ACSOL to Challenge Passport Identifier in Federal Court

The Alliance for Constitutional Sex Offense Laws (ACSOL) will challenge the passport identifier recently revealed by the U.S. State Department. The challenge is expected to be filed in a federal district court within the next 90 days.

“We have begun the necessary process of identifying a strategy for a successful challenge,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. “The strategy will include the identification of potential plaintiffs as well as both legal and financial resources. The federal district court in which the challenge will be filed has not yet been determined. That decision will be made after potential plaintiffs have been identified.”

The addition of a “unique identifier” to the passports of some registrants is one of the requirements of the International Megan’s Law (IML) which was Congress passed Congress and the President signed in February 2016. Registrants to be affected by this provision are those convicted of a sex offense involving a minor and are currently required to register as a sex offender.

The IML does not include a description of the “unique identifier” or its placement in an individual’s passport. According to a press release issued by the State Department on October 27, 2017, the following language will be added to the inside back cover of affected passports: “The bearer was convicted of a sex offense against a minor, and is a covered sex offender pursuant to 22 United States Code Section 212(c)(1).”

Prior to passage of the IML, no American passport has included a “unique identifier” for a U.S. citizen. The IML does not require the State Department to add such an identifier to the passports of U.S. citizens convicted of murder, robbery drunk driving or any other offense.

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  22. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

232 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I am ready to be a plaintiff if you need one more. My wife’s in US and her family is in Vietnam and I’d like to travel there with my wife and son to see her family. Got pulled out of the line at LAX everytime upon return to California. This IML passport marking will make it worse: I don’t think I can travel there or take my family travel anywhere for vacation. I had one count of 288(c) 3 yrs probation, then got reduced to misdemeanor and dismissed 1203.4. Must register for life. This was my only thing for the past 25 years.

It doesn’t make sense for registrants to go through the notification process for traveling knowing that they will never be allowed to enter any country thanks to the alert notices sent out by the angel watch center and now the unique identifier on the passports of registrants which make them easy targets. Chris Smith’s speech about how registrants traveling overseas to commit sexual crime is fallacious because no one on the registry would be crazy enough to get caught doing something illegal and be punished even harsher than what he/she was being punished for the first time. There’s no way that IML will ever prevent child sex trafficking and tourism by stopping registrants from entering a foreign country, because the real criminals that are doing these things are not on the registry and haven’t got caught and our government is still focusing their attention on registered citizens in the US, because they are easy targets for there past crimes. They use phony science & statistics about the “frightening high” recidivism rate just to scare people and putting all government agencies on false alert, which is nothing more like a boy crying out wolf that isn’t there and thought this was funny, but he does it again long enough that when the real wolf came and chased the boy they all ignored him.

I have never understood how Florida can keep you on the Registry when you are no longer under Florida Jurisdiction or in a Probation/Parole Status. The same with States that are telling people they Must register even if they Move to another state or country. If Federal law has issues with application to a person out of the country how can State law be legal or Implied over a Individual that is outside its territory and control?. I am going to assume the fact is nobody has really challenged it? Please correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks

PK informed me before of an attorney in New York looking to take this on. I’ve already messaged them and am awaiting response. Im not sure the ACLU would take a case like this as I’m not sure which Human Rights are being violated

This really is a huge step for ACSOL since they are now challenging an actual law and not just a technicality. While I would love some assistance in my case, this is a bigger step then usual. I wish them luck, this is going to be an important precedence either way..

Well… Now that State has implemented the law, the matter is no longer moot and the court can now look at the actuality of their actions

I have not seen anyone comment on the fact that this law is based on CONVICTION not if you have to register or not. Meaning, even if you are OFF the registry, you would still have this mark on your passport! I hope I am wrong, but when I first read IML that was one of the major components of this stupid law. I would really appreciate if someone would clarify this for me. Hopefully the the packingham case, as well as the ruling in the 10th and 6th circuits, and others, can help this fight. They say they are going to ‘revoke’ the passport, does that mean, if we travel and come back in the US, will they take it then? As far as the this case, I am in the 10th, and if any plaintiffs are needed from here, please put me on the list. Progress is being made by great attorneys who we SO much appreciate, and hopefully the ACLU will also jump in and help with all their resources. Thank you Janice and all those on board fighting for us

@E:
You may want to reach out to the Chicago lawyers that beat up Pleasant Prairie, WI (http://fox6now.com/2017/04/18/sex-offenders-win-federal-lawsuit-against-village-of-pleasant-prairie-its-going-to-open-a-lot-of-doors/), earlier this year. From the story, their names are Adele Nicholas & Mark Weinberg. I found mention of them on another site about a conference held in 2016 (http://www.registry20.org/bios.html), which also happens to have included one Miriam Aukerman. For CA RCs, Catherine Carpenter, Professor of Law at SW Law School, was also part of the mix.

I think RCs affected by NY’s and WI’s rules should pay attention to each other’s legal maneuvers. A Federal win in either Circuit could be used in the other; and if a win in one and a loss in the other…SCOTUS, here it comes!

P.S. If we get to vote, I cast mine for IML being challenged in the 6th, perhaps with aid from Aukerman, Weinberg, and Nicholas. A solid legal team, for sure!

@Janice
Not that you need advice! But one wonders, once DHS/Marshalls sends the list to State Dept, and we start getting our letters of revocation, could we send a Cease and Desist letter and/or sue for an injunction immediately? Is that even a thing, or is that just Law and Order TV law? I hope we can. And then send about 10,000 press releases with the reasons for the Cease and Desist educating the media and public.

THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU ARE DOING!

I had a recent thought. How will the state department know where to send the revocation letters? When I applied for my passport that was 3-4 addresses ago. And my only listed address is overseas. Will they shoot me an email? Still waiting on a reply from ICE and DHS on regards of how to even check to see if you’re affected by this.

Not all the media coverage is negative. Just spotted this letter to the editor of the Tulsa (OK) World, signed by Darrin O. Swait, Broken Arrow (who’s that?). I like the tact that it can happen to your teenage child who can be branded for life. Focus on the danger to parents of these laws.

The Carl Hanson stats are perhaps not helpful, but what are the “95 studies” he cites?

HARSH LAWS

The claims that sex offenders’ re-offense rates are frightening and high have been solidly disproven. In fact, statistics now show that re-offense rates for this group of offenders, less than 5 percent, is among the lowest of all categories.

But who needs facts? If your child (and don’t think it can’t happen) is arrested for sexting, he or she will be on the registry. In Oklahoma, this means for life. He or she would be denied jobs, housing and so much more.

Because of the International Megan’s Law, passports would carry an “identifier” that designates the holder as a sex offender against a minor. Imagine the difficulty trying to travel, to see the world, or go on a family vacation. Because of the Adam Walsh Act, if he or she were to ever fall in love with someone in a foreign country, a sponsorship for that person to get into the U.S. would be impossible.

Imposing such laws is not something that we should be doing to our citizens. Restricting travel has no connection with sexting, entrapment operations, urinating in public or teenagers having sex with one another. The punishment should fit the crime.

These laws are ridiculous and need to be stopped. Write your legislator to stop them before you or someone you know is permanently affected in a tragic way.

Darrin O. Swait, Broken Arrow

Editor’s note: A study by Karl Hanson and Kelly E. Morton-Bourgon of Public Safety Canada conducted a meta-analysis of 95 studies involving a combined sample of 31,216 sex offenders. The average sexual recidivism rate found was 13.7 percent and the average overall recidivism rate was 36.9 percent, based on an average follow-up period of five to six years.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/wednesday-letters-to-the-editor-for-nov/article_b5bcd379-6eac-5ef1-81d1-ab96ce633748.html

Are they going to give us these new passports for free or are we going to have to pay for them? At $110 a pop even if there were only 100,000 people that this applied to across the US it would still be $11 million dollars. I bet we could sue for that amount.

Once customs swipes any passport on the computer there’s a automatic notification, i heard the computer beep while crossing into Canada back in 2009 but was *not* denied entry,in only secondary and thats it, I passed through (flown) into qudalajara 6 years ago with no problem, yes my passport was swiped but no alarm/no secondary *my opinion* is that this stamp is straight and deliberate with intentional defamation!!! (( with or without out this stamp once the passport is swiped cbp/customs are alerted on the spot…

I have a passport just 6 months old, and was planning to travel to England to visit my great-grandfather’s grave, and a monastery in Surrey. I am a Level 2 registered S.O. in Massachusetts, and have a squeaky clean record of incarceration, therapy, recovery, and 10 years of probation completed in February 2017. I am outraged at this nonsense, and would be glad to be a plaintiff in your lawsuit if it would be helpful.

Thanks. Frosty

“If a broad ban on firearms can be upheld based on conjecture that the public might feel safer (while being no safer at all), then the Second Amendment guarantees nothing.”

Can this be changed to “If a broad ban on [travel via IML/SORNA/State Registration Laws] can be upheld based on conjecture that the public might feel safer (while being no safer at all), then the [freedom of movement/right to travel/right to privacy/right to second chance/pay your debt to society/4th, 5th, and 6th admentments] guarantees nothing.”

“Registrants to be affected by this provision are those convicted of a sex offense involving a minor and are currently required to register as a sex offender”

Does anyone know how this will affect former registrants passports who know longer have to register as a sex offender? It says registrants, does that include former? The statement also says “and”. To me It doesn’t sound like it includes former registrants as they would have wrote “or” instead?

I renewed my passport about 6 months ago. It contains no such markings of any kind and appears identical to my previous one. It’s good for ten years. I am not on parole or any supervision other than being a registrant. If I intend to travel out of the country, am I obligated by law to notify law enforcement authorities? and will they make me change my passport if this law is finalized?

I do not believe that a plausable argument attacking the gun laws has ever occurred. I think the arbitrary and familial protection along with the separation of powers arguments, just to name a few, if argued correctly could be successful, same issues, a judge would have to find a nexus with your offense and/or some kind of proclivities for violence. This might be a little harder since there is empirical evidence and a true “frightening and high” recidivism rate for violent offenders, therefore cementing a rational basis for that group. But, this is a big but, a judge has to determine if you are a member of that class of offenders and base their decisions on a individualized bases. I will be going for this next, I just didn’t want the issue in my current case.

The sad issue of all this is nothing is consistent. Some people never have issues and others do!. I have been on vacation with no issues when the Country was notified but yet turned away when they didnt!. I have seen reporting even after the trips occurred. Systems go online and off with computers. I was told you have the Notifications and sometimes a alert goes with the flight manifest. Some places run the passenger list before the plane even lands. So many variables seem to depend on if you will get in a country or not (Sometimes its simply the Immigration Officer ignoring or not seeing the alert) . The additional wording I believe is to catch and correct the problems with the current system. I suggest anybody that has had travel issues do a FOIA request to actually see what prevented entry and on what authority.

I know that the “ripeness factor” was an issue with the previous challenge to IML.

I was under the impression that a Law is ripe when someone has been affected by it in an adverse way. If they’re just now starting the process of changing Passports to include the Mark, still nobody has yet to be affected by the inclusion of the Mark on their Passport.

Could someone clue me in on when conditions are such that a new Law has become ripe?

Tim Lawyer…If you are an actual attorney, please take a look at general comments for Nov. and let me know what you think…Also, if Janice, Chance, or any other individuals or organizations wishes to comment, I would greatly appreciate their input…..Thank you…This is happening and I would love some support………..

PK, as long as there is an imminent harm, and the action is codified and properly enacted, I am under the impression that it can be challenged and is in fact ripe. You do not have to actually be harmed before you can sue….

AJ, you did see what posted in general comments right? Stay tuned because we might need to do some more collaboration before the 20th of next month. I will let you guys know as soon as I get their reply brief which should be real soon now….I am sure the AG has something up her malicious sleeves…..I am really surprised at how fast this ball is rolling in my case..Dec. 20th…..

Any new updates with this?

I’m still waiting for a response from NY about being stuck on their registry even though I no longer live in the country and this is stressing me out more and more as the time to renew my visa comes along.

It’s gotten to the point where it’s the only thing I can think about and it’s affecting my work as this will in effect, affect my ability to work and live where I live.