ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (7/10 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Click here to sign up now for ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18
Download a PDF of the schedule

General News

International Travel

In an effort to keep this site organized and the comments on the topic of each post, comments, questions and suggestions regarding International Travel will be moved to this post. Please use this for all further immigration / emigration / customs related contributions.

NEW: International Megan’s Law – International Travel Action Group

Also see:
International Travel – Mexico
Living with 290: Traveling to Cabo San Lucas

Resources for International Travel

DHS Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (DHS TRIP)

The Department of Homeland Security Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (DHS TRIP) is a single point of contact for individuals who have inquiries or seek resolution regarding difficulties they experienced during their travel screening at transportation hubs—like airports and train stations—or crossing U.S. borders,

Tip from comments:

Go onto the Homeland Security web site and file whats called a Redress (your addressing your being held up or perhaps miss flights/etc due to constantly being stopped when you re-enter the country). Then, when you travel and re-enter the country, hand both the paper (they will email you a very official paper) and your passport to Customs. The first time I did this, the Customs Officer seemed to not know what it was and the Supervisor read it and I was on my way.


Inadmissibility – Reasons for inadmissibility – Overcome criminal convictions – Deemed rehabilitation

Rehabilitation For Persons Who Are Inadmissible to Canada Because of Past Criminal Activity


International Travel for Residents of AWA States – AWA compliant States

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
    4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
    5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
    6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
    7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
    8. 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.
    9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
    10. Please do not post in all Caps.
    11. 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.
    12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
    13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
    14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
    15. Please do not solicit funds
    16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
    17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
    18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
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.  
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Quick question: What is the exact page of the “shangun” (spelling?) that list countries that allow 290 to arrive via USA plane travel. Thanks

Such a page doesn’t exist as policy from the EU, the U.S. or the signatory countries that comprise Schengen. “Schengen,” by the way, was named after a town in Luxembourg where the treaty was signed between twenty-two of the twenty-eight countries comprising the European Union. Individual states’ policies which allow sex offender Registrants to enter those countries are not part of the Schengen Agreement, as such, but remain entirely within the authority of those individual states. If individual countries have a stated, i.e. written policy directive regarding sex offenders that is available to members of the public through the Web, that is another matter (and unrelated to Schengen), although I have not yet seen them. It just so happens that the Schengen countries (as well as some others that are NOT Schengen) are allowing U.S. Registrants in at the present time. This would appear to be entirely coincidental although those countries are also on the more sophisticated end of the criminal justice policy scale. So, it’s a “European social thing” more than it is an “EU thing.” Notice how Ireland, the U.K., and Russia don’t allow Registrants in. They are, arguably, the “least-European” of European countries. Most Brits, traditionally, would have been loathe to consider themselves as part of Europe as the social differences were so great. There is a great deal of hostility for Europe expressed by both the U.K. and Russia. Ireland is another matter.

Thank you David. An attorney directed me to this website to “find a page” that has a list of countries that permit a US registered citizen to travel from the United States to, say Spain, for example. And, then from Spain one could travel via rail to most European countries. I have heard that a flight from the US to Heathrow England is not possible but US to Spain is. I’m discharging parol soon and this country is no longer “free”. I have a specific country in mind, where family awaits. Any suggestions on finding out where I can see a lawful travel list?

You’re fine with most countries in Western and Central Europe. If you stick with Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Paris, Milan, Rome, Madrid, Barcelona, Lisbon, etc. as your points of arrival then you should have no problems flying or crossing borders anywhere else in the E.U. with the exception of Ireland and the “brexiting” U.K.

Thanks again David. Could a registered US citizen fly direct from New York to Denmark, Finland, Sweden or Norway? Is there a website that provides such info?


thanks JM but that site is a mess. any other site suggestions?

This has been discussed in great detail in various Threads in this Blog. A little research would go a long way.

Hi David,

A little recap since my last posting to about a year ago. I went to Bali and Taiwan without any issues. I spent the night in the Singapore Airport for fear of not being allowed out or deported. I was not asked any questions and wasn’t subjected to secondary screening.

I also didn’t do the SORNA notification and no one said anything.

The same can’t be said for when I came back, which was more than the usual mess.

I went to Scotland and London a year and half ago without any issues.

I am now more than a touch concerned about this passport issue and I am not sure if I will be asked to turn it in or not. I guess it is a waiting game.



Wow! Well, great to hear that it is still possible to get into S’pore and, especially, Bali and Taiwan (both places which I am missing, these days) but we are still left scratching our heads, it would seem. We don’t know why some people manage to elude entry refusal and to what extent it may be due to simple latitude exercised by individuals currently on duty or to actual policy distinctions. And Scotland and London? Fantastic! Can I ask if you served time in prison and, if so, how long and how many years ago? I ask because the Brits make a distinction in duration of imprisonment and how far in the past. According to them, I can have no expectation of ever getting in since I served five years even though it was nearly a quarter-century ago. Anyway, congratulations! I hope you had a good time. As for the passport marking; yes, you are right to be concerned. However, both ACSOL and NARSOL have announced their intention to challenge the “unique markings” specifically and not the IML, as a whole (“yet,” in the case of ACSOL and “never” in the case of NARSOL who believe such a challenge to be nearly impossible). Thank you so much for checking back in. We have a questionnaire around here somewhere which it would be great if you could fill out and then post in our forum. Oh wow! Someone has really spruced-up that submission page! Here it is:

Hopefully this won’t detract from your questions to AngryFrustrated, David. I read your discourse with Robin at NARSOL, and frankly, I was a bit confused at first about which aspects of IML they are going to challenge. But in her most recent response, she said that it was the notification aspects of IML that NARSOL would focus on.

Is that what you are referring to as a “unique marking”?

No, of course not. Jump in. I’m confused, too, CR. I never really got much clarity from Robin on that but, based on Larry’s statements on the phone conference marathon a few days ago (I recommend everyone listen to it as Dubbeling is very impressive but quite discouraging in regards to the real “notifications”) it appears that it is the “unique marking” alone that NARSOL will challenge.

@David Kennerly

I have read the exchange between you and Robin @NARSOL on who is going after what.

From what I have read and am interpreting on my own is: 1) ACSOL is going after the passport marker and 2) NARSOL is going after foreign notification by USG to other nations (via DHS and US Marshals (USM) I presume). Is that correct in my mind? If so, then #2 would go after the notifications sent to Interpol from USM and thus squashing green notices then sent on?

In a scorecard like fashion, it would be helpful to understand who has what lane of idea/action for the masses to follow since actually, both are important overall.

If theses are correct, then would it not help to have a collaborative effort through these two distinct efforts where each supports the other through briefs, etc in addition to get briefs from other entities?

TS, you may very well be right. I am reviewing all of this, including re-listening to the phone conference with Paul Dubbeling, and have written to Brenda at NARSOL, to understand which elements they are going to challenge. My initial impression was that they were going after passport marking even though Robin reiterated that it would be “notification” (but didn’t, in fact, specify which of the three forms of “notification” are at play in IML). So, I may have gotten that all wrong. I certainly HOPE so since we really need the underlying purpose of IML to be challenged, especially if ACSOL is taking on the passport mark. That would be the best of both worlds. Yes, it would be great if they could work together. However, NARSOL made it pretty clear that that was not in the cards. I think that it would also be fantastic if the ACLU were to make an appearance. We can hope.

@David Kennerly

We await your findings with much interest at hand on what NARSOL intends or thinks they are going to strike at with ACSOL certainly throwing the gauntlet down on passport markings.

I suppositioned using what Robin had said in his words and drew my conclusion from them, which could be off, of course. Therefore, your findings will be helpful. I will refrain from further speculation on “what ifs” until you get clarification.

However, entities working individually concerns me where a collaborative or “a friendly assist “effort from a major player would be better for all interested parties. A gunslinger hates to be one bullet short in their bandoliers and belt when it comes to a gunfight.

Does anyone know why there sometimes does not appear a “reply” button next to a post? Anyway, I’m trying to reply to TS regarding clarification on NARSOL’s intentions in challenging IML. It isn’t official yet but the tentative reply coming back from them is that “everything’s on the table” meaning that a decision has not yet been made about which aspect of IML to challenge. I’ve made my preference known: to challenge the authority of the U.S. to denigrate its citizens through notification of foreign governments.

Here’s now the official word from Brenda Jones: “I think all options are still on the table at this point. Paul [Dubbeling, presumably] and the rest of the team are still gathering information and ideas. I think what will make the difference in whatever we might file will be the strength of the claims that might be asserted and whether it will set a good precedent for other challenges.” So, it appears that nothing is yet written in stone, perhaps even whether to file a lawsuit.

@David Kennerly, Gunslinger w/o a gun

I believe no reply button is there because the thread has been indented enough with sub-replies, but that is a guess based upon previous experience and could be off on that.

Well, if everything is on the table then for them to consider accordingly based upon funds, effort, personnel, etc, then you’d think a powers that be conference would be helpful to see how best to progress and on what topics for whom. It shall be interesting to here of the outcome(s).

I think a conference would be wonderful. However, we need to keep in mind that lawyers need to keep some/most things close to their chest for obvious strategic reasons. I do like this synergy that has developed here, of late between the more legally-minded people. It’s become a really great meeting place where they can learn from each other as well as an opportunity for everyone else to learn, too. I would love it if someone were to create some pages here of recent and upcoming legal challenges and note their significance.

Given T. is not a member of I’pol, one could perhaps travel through there and fall into an AWC black hole….

Okay, I noticed this also in an earlier post of yours; you need to be less reliant on acronyms. Sorry!

Sorry, I sometimes get cryptic in an effort to reduce words being easily found via a search or site scrape. “T.” should be clear, as my post was a thread off yours where you mentioned a couple places you miss. “I’pol” I hope is clear. “AWC” is our friends in DC who let others know about us.

I personally know two different people who were deported from Taiwan and blacklisted there due to US DHS alerts. One guy is married to a Taiwan national.

Have you, or they, submitted a travel experience report here? That would be terrific. Thanks!

Hi David,

In response to your questions.

I was in prision for 1.5 years and released in 1999. Finished Probation in 2002. I am now out 15 years without any issues or reoffenses.

To clarify, I did not leave the Singapore Airport. I was allowed access to Bali and Taiwan without issue.

I have been to Taiwan about 5 to 6 times in the past 5 years as my Partner is from Taiwan.

I’m not sure, given yours and others comments on the UK situation on how I was allowed entry.

My biggest concern is asking too many questions and having someone start inquiring and what little freedoms I currently have being revoked.
I’m not on any websites, nor publicly searchable.

My partner, along with his family is planning a trip to Taiwan in March, I have decided not to go until this whole thing is figured out… If it ever does.

David, do you know of anyone who has received an Official letter regarding their passport change yet?

On google— look under RTAG Florida action committee– they copied a july 2016 RTAG template.

thank you

This is very interesting coming from NARSOL and not ACSOL. They have announced a legal challenge to the passport mark requirement of IML. My question is, does either ACSOL or NARSOL believe that challenging the notification requirements of IML to be hopeless? Larry Neely seemed to be suggesting that in a recent conversation I had with him. However, I would not want us to abandon that essential liberty interest. I hope that ACSOL has not, either and yet, we are only hearing about the passport mark from both organizations. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

Question: With IML, do we throw it all at the wall and see if any of it sticks (Angel Watch, notices sent, etc) in addition to the identifier? Or do we go after one piece at a time? If one thing at a time, I’m surprised nobody has ever gone after the green notices, and the shady set up of the Angel Watch center…

Frustrating to see Narsol constantly minimizing IML. Maybe that’s why Janice and Chance launched ACSOL? I’d love to hear how that came about…

I’m wondering whether we need to launch a foundation that can then channel funding as needed. Buy some public lists of RCs, do some direct mail, ask them to pass it on to their families, and see how much we could raise…

I was under the impression that Janice and ASCOL were going to challenge the Passport Identifier.

The Notification Requirement has to be challenged.

I don’t know what’s going on. It doesn’t appear that the two organizations are filing this jointly. I get the feeling that they haven’t even discussed such a possibility. Further, we are hearing disturbingly little about challenging the regime of foreign notification since it so much more egregious in preventing travel than the passport markings. NARSOL is convinced that the government is within its authority to provide information about its citizens to foreign governments.

We should clarify our terms so that we know what we mean by “notification.”

Here are the relevant ones from my perspective:

Advance Registrant Notification: Obligation of Registrant to notify the U.S. government of impending travel.

Foreign Notification: All of the methods that the U.S. employs to notify foreign governments of American Registrants status of which several are identified: per-trip notification generated by Angel Watch as a result of Advance Registrant Notification or PNR passenger name record hits generated when purchasing tickets to or from the U.S., continuous U.S. Registrant data available to all or most countries immigration points of entry provided by U.S. and INTERPOL networks. This data just lives indefinitely on these systems waiting for a U.S. Registrant to come along and to sound an alarm.

Passport Identifier Notification: notifies anyone who has occasion to see passport, whether foreign or domestic, governmental or private, of passport-holder’s registration status. This will certainly include hotels and banks in foreign countries.

It probably would be a good idea to possibly have another phone conference with Janice to specifically address these new IML challenges. This would help many of the newcomers to this Blog understand what is up-and-coming, and would give people time to think about how they could support this effort from a personal level.

I know that NARSOL is having a phone conference tonight.

I think you clarified exactly what the differences are in terms of Notification.
Advanced Registrant Notification vs. Foreign Country Notification.

The Passport Identifier Issue isn’t so much a Notification, and probably should have been excluded from the original IML Challenge Lawsuit. I was told that the original challenge was much too broad.

The NARSOL Phone Conference this evening went into a lot of detail about these Foreign Country Notification. Hopefully you will be able to listen to this recorded conference.

It would be crucial to assess the success of any Litigation regarding these Notices, and Paul R from RTAG indicated during the Conference that he has hard copies of these. 2 years ago, I emailed him a copy of the email received by the Immigration Office that was received by the Country’s Main Immigration Office. I don’t think this could be construed as an actual Foreign Country Notification.

Yeah, I was lurking on the call. A bit discouraging, wasn’t it? Paul Dubbeling was particularly interesting while not exactly reassuring.

Yes somewhat discouraging indeed. I have to say I’m skeptical about PaulR’s indication that he has actual Notices. Someone from his organization has expressed some disappointment with his lack of responsiveness and commitment to RTAG’s Mission.
I know he took the Notice and all of the private information that I had emailed to him and ran off, never heard from PaulR again. Don’t get me wrong, he’s nice and everything, and I know he’s dedicated a lot of time to this ….

I’m very hesitant to speak ill of someone who is not here to represent himself. However, I have a lot of concerns, too. RTAG is something of a one-man band and one with an apparent lack of responsiveness to other motivated and engaged stakeholders. There are policy directions that RTAG has taken to which I’m certainly not privileged or consulted. There are statements that are made which leave me with questions and concerns. I’m saying this as someone who was initially in on the formation of the group (or believed himself to be) but, apparently, any opportunity for input has passed me by. Perhaps there are some who have such an opportunity, I don’t know. But that’s the problem; there is much which is unknown about RTAG, how decisions are made, what directions they take, etc. When it first started, I was one of the people encouraging others to report their travel experiences to RTAG as the lead organization for gathering this data. Prior to that, this forum was the place to report all such experiences, something that says much about the uniqueness and power of this forum. I wish now that we had tried to get ACSOL (then California RSOL) to put together a better-structured collection of traveler experiences on its own site since we all have a stake in knowing what is going on. If RTAG follows through on Paul’s idea to limit access to this data, then we might lose that resource. He may have entirely valid reasons for not wanting to make this data available to everyone, which includes our enemies then that should be something to be discussed with other stakeholders, not just a unilateral decision. After all, those who contributed those traveler experiences would have the expectation that this data be made available.

But there’s lots of unresponsiveness to go around, isn’t there? By that, I mean, RTAG isn’t the only, nearly opaque organization. Maybe opacity is a virtue. Certainly the French Resistance had to be opaque and maybe we do, too. What troubles me is that individuals who have something to contribute can get shut out when no one feels an obligation to acknowledge their presence.

“What troubles me is that individuals who have something to contribute can get shut out when no one feels an obligation to acknowledge their presence.”
I think many believe this is their private gig.

“I think many believe this is their private gig”
That was expressed to me as well. I think the term I was told was “All hat no cattle”

The job of collecting and disseminating important RSO travel information and experiences is not only important to RSO’s, but now we’ve learned it would crucial information to any future challenge to IML

I mean- if it’s all about giving jobs like this to friends who want to then hold such valuable information closely to their chest- I don’t see how this would be helpful for anyone.

Frankly, I prefer to scour Janice’s Blog to find and interpret travel experiences myself, because it is firsthand information, and seems to much more reliable.

I don’t see why it would be so difficult to modify this Website (Janice’s Blog) and at the very top Menu provide a Link “International Travel” to a Form for travelers to provide their experiences. A spreadsheet of the results, matrix, or graph, could then be generated from this very easily, and could be the 2nd Sub Link in the Menu.

Having this information collected and displayed as a 2nd Website under the control of a single person, who may or may not have the resources to continually maintain this- makes no sense to me.

I suggested this years ago, and still to this day people on this Blog have said they had “no idea at all” about RTAG. I don’t see it displayed anywhere on Janice’s Blog- and it should be.

What i don’t understand is how does NY, a state , have any authority over someone who is NOT a resident ? If i move to Texas, Texas has jurisdiction over me as a resident, not NY.
Also, regarding international travel, since NY does NOT participate in the federal SORNA, would you have to notify them of your travel plans ?

Correct me if I’m wrong but I guess the reason why President Obama signed the IML into law, was due to him being under pressure by the majority of Republican members in the congress that was spearheaded by Chris Smith to get the IML to pass using junk science and phony statistics of the “frightening high recidivism” without giving the opposition a chance to speak out against it before it got passed last year, am I correct?

Well, I don’t think that pressure put on Obama by Republicans made any difference. Obama didn’t want to be the guy who refused to stick it to pedophiles after the Republicans slammed it through the House and the Senate using his sleazy “suspension of the rules.” It was Obama’s reputational legacy. The Democrats held Smith’s bills at bay in previous years before the Republicans took control of both houses. Whether their motivations were meritorious or if they were just playing the same game as their Republican colleagues in jamming up the works for one another doesn’t really matter. The point is that this bill sailed through both Houses, more-or-less, once the Republicans controlled Congress. And Obama wasn’t going to be the guy to go to bat for perverts. It’s that simple. If it had just been the Democrats controlling Congress though, IML would not have gone through. Democrats now see this kind of law as aggressively penal where penal is not supposed to be, i.e. ex-post facto punishment consisting of Soviet-era internal banishment. Ten years or more ago they would have gone for it. Certainly, Clinton would have gone for it. Today, not so much, to their credit. The few Democrats who supported IML, like Barbara Mikulsky are total police state, sex-hating fanatics. She had a reputation in Baltimore for this shit going back to the 70s.

I have no idea why people here believe that democrats and republicans are anything short of equals when it comes to SO laws.

Very blue California, historically, has not been friendly. Even the long-overdue tiering bill isn’t all that great, and there’s still a few years for them to muck it up before it actually goes into effect.

Equally blue New York is a lifetime disaster, whether you currently live there anymore or not.

Illnois, in an attempt to keep out-of-state registrants from moving there, automatically labels every out-of-state registrant a “sexual predator” and mandates lifetime registration, regardless of the conviction, how long ago, etc etc (public act 97-0578)

And then, of course, there’s red Florida.

So why do we continue on as if there’s really a difference between which party is friendlier? Both of them are horrendous!

That’s right the Florida Registration scheme is simply unspeakable.
I’ve accepted the fact that I would never be able to live in my hometown City of Miami.
In fact, I can’t think of any State where I could live and be productive, except the one little place where I technically live now and I don’t have to register. Luckily for me, it’s an economically vibrant city.
So hence the reason why I’m hoping that my newfound Country will give me the Visa. According to my Lawyer in that Country, I have a good shot. I just don’t know how well things would go if somehow my Passport were to be revoked in the near future. I hope not!

I hear ya. You and I live in the same little vibrant “spot”.

Hello. can you share with us miserable fellow offenders where this ‘spot’ is please?

Hello. can you share with us miserable fellow offenders where this ‘spot’ is please?

No because then some Lawmaker or Staff Member in that area, who monitors this website would propose “changes”, “amendment”, or “bill” then we’d be f******

The point is the NY Registry sucks, and this BS about giving someone with a Misdemeanor Conviction- a plea deal for a 10 year registration period, and then changing that retroactively (ex post facto) to become lifetime registration, should be challenged federally. I would be down for that, although I wouldn’t want to go it alone.

I’m one of the poor a****** who has to stay on NY’s Registry for f******ever even thou I haven’t lived, worked, or payed taxes in NY for 15 years!


There a few guys in NY in the same position re retroactively (ex post facto) who are being asked if they want to take the case to the NYS Court system- not Federal.

Well count me in if you need another challenger.

What I have learned is that if you loose via the State Courts, you cannot then challenge Federally.

Well, my position is that they are roughly the same but with subtle differences. That’s why my evaluation of them is nuanced to reflect those slight differences. As I’ve said many times before, I am an outsider when doing so as I despise the Democrats and Republicans more-or-less equally and as a longtime Libertarian. I say what I do when others go off on a rant about how evil one of the two parties is relative to the other. They do not lend themselves to a black-and-white analysis. Nevertheless, Democrats are, currently, slightly better for us than Republicans. They have not always been so but, right now, they are. That’s not exactly a ringing endorsement. For the record, I think Obama was a civil liberties nightmare.

Why is New York a lifetime disaster?

If youre above a level 1 you get lifetime registration and are stuck on the registry for life regardless if you live in the state or even the country. I currently live outside of the country, my crime originated out of state, but NY refuses to remove me from the registry as i may one day come back to it. Although i have no plans of ever returning to the US. Addtionally i must update them still every time i move or create any new identifier, as well as send them an updated photo every few years. All from thw other side of thw world.

At least your’e free!!!!

That was the same thing my court appointed told me when he had me sign the paper to be on this list. You cant call it freedom if you need to worry that your former government will send its goons to get you because you never recieved a letter that your passport is revoked and deported to a country in which you have no family or ties.

Then be barred from ever going back to the country where you have made a normal life with your wife and in turn barred from being with your family again because they cant get a US visa because youre on “the list”

If thats what you call freedom i would rather not be American, but to do that you have to pay 2000USD and chance getting deported back anyway as you no longer have a valid passport. (and yes the US is one of the only countries that allow you to renounce citizenship without another citizenship)

If that happens, once you hit US soil you go to jail for being an illegal immigrant without a country and live out life in prison.

There is no freedom, there is no justice, there is no sanity.

I see that I was unclear here: “Obama didn’t want to be the guy who refused to stick it to pedophiles after the Republicans slammed it through the House and the Senate using his sleazy “suspension of the rules.”” The “he” referred to here was Chris Smith, not Obama.

The Republicans were in no position to pressure Obama, especially in the waning days of his administration. Remember, the two parties were utterly and completely intractable and still are. The only thing that motivated Obama was, at that point, his reputation and the upcoming Presidential election. If the Democrats had controlled Congress, IML would NOT have gotten through. But they did and Obama signed it because, why not? There was no downside to him or the Democrats in doing so. If he had vetoed it, he would be being called the best friend of pedophiles right now. That’s a huge disincentive in a time of mass-hysteria about sex offenders.

Good analysis, David. Although there was a couple of articles
from prominant papers equating IML with Nazi and Soviet actions, it had no effect and was basically was not an issue with the base of the democratic party. But if Obama vetoed the bill, it would be used to label other democratics (Hillary, pizza and pedophiles anyone?).

Yes, those articles give us hope for the future but it was too early in this emerging period of greater honesty about “sex offenders” to have made any political difference. Politicians, in general, are loathe to innovate. Certainly not Prez Obama or Congress or any President or any Congress, for that matter. They’re constantly pitching to a dumbed-down electorate and studiously posturing as sage and temperate wise men. Except for Donald who takes tremendous pride in his intemperance although he’s so ignorant he doesn’t even know what it is he is supposed to pretend to be. A weird sort of virtue, perhaps.

Yes, a virtue for him. That kind of personality repels guilt and self doubt. That keeps him going where the diet of Big Macs and chocolate shakes should have killed him 20 years ago. Unfortunately, the country is going through the cardiac arrest.

Does anyone know if Iceland will take an RSO?

I don’t think that we’ve received any reports on Iceland but my guess is that it would be no problem. They are Scandinavian, essentially, and they are not very hysterical, in general.

Yes, it is but I don’t believe that Schengen, by itself, is meaningful vis-a-vis IML refusals. I think that it is a coincidence that European countries who let us in are nearly all in Schengen. Croatia would be an exception of a non-Schengen country which I believe lets Registrants in. Also, I think it likely that Montengro, Macedonia, Serbia, Bosnia, Kosovo and Albania would let Registrants in but we have no reports on them. I don’t think that Schengen has an explicit policy regarding Registrants. It’s more a matter of European culture rather than treaties that allow us in.

Mostly the English speaking countries will give you trouble

As to travel notice in Illinois, I’m still operating under the requirement listed on the back of the registration form, “Temporary absences for more than 3 days in a calendar year require you to register your new address.” I have traveled abroad as recently as last summer and registered a “change of address” to a hotel in the foreign country two days before leaving, and that was accepted as adequate, with the reminder to change address back to home within three days of return. Once, I came in more than three days before leaving and was turned away and told to come back.

There has been much mention of a 21 day advance notice. I know that Illinois is not SORNA complaint, but I have read that even so, SORNA is a federal law in force everywhere. For now, I’m going with what the registration officers tell me.

I agree at 100%. What we are waiting for? Every group fights for their rights ,write petitions, goes to DC. What did we accomplish with the IML? Just getting mark in the passport, sending back from different countries saying that we are going for the child sex tourism. Is it not time to act and accomplish?

I agree with 100%. What did we accomplish with IML? Why other groups go to D.C. ,write petitions, fight for their rights? We are accepting marks in the passport, sending back from different countries because they receive letter that we are going for child sex tourism. Lets do something to accomplish in some way.

This may be off-topic but I have a question. I got my new passport today and there is no identifier or symbol of any kind regarding an offender. I thought there would be. If I tried to go to Mexico will they still know without the sign on the passport?

I’m a 311 btw.

Congratulations on getting an unmarked passport – that’s a good sign but it appears that notifications about your status can or will still be forwarded to other countries. Other people with porn-only charges have been subjected to these notifications. Obviously, before the passports began to be marked individuals were subjected to refusal of entry. Mexico has stringently barred American Registrants from their country and I would guess that you will not be allowed in. The passport marking is just a peculiar additional feature/weapon the absence of which offers no particular benefit apart from not notifying everyone else who may see your passport such as banks and hotel staff.

Thanks for your reply. If I cross into Mexico or Canada, they will check my passport and actually check my name on a large database of registrants? Even if I drive there and walk across the border?

congrats in your passport question what was you offence and are still registering I went to mexico in July 2017 with my new passport with no problem just to let you know I’m not on the system and I don’t register any more

@Have had it

If you drive or walk across the border into Canada, they will scan your passport and deny you entry.

If you drive or walk into Mexico, 99% of the time you just go right in and there is no passport check (even if they did a spot check and asked to see your passport, they would only check that the picture is you – they do not scan it).

Keep in mind, though, that if you are subject to IML, you need to file the 21 day advance notice before going into Mexico. Mexico doesn’t care about this, but when you leave Mexico, US Border Patrol will scan your passport and send you to Secondary Inspection. I have not yet heard of a case where the Border Patrol has asked you to prove that you gave the 21 day notice, but I wouldn’t want you to be the first case, since it is a mandatory 10 year federal sentence for not notifying.

This information was still accurate 30 days ago (last time my wife drove into Mexico), but anything is subject to change without notice.

Hi All, I have been offered a great opportunity to visit and speak in South Africa next year for 6 days. I tried looking up info specifically to see if traveling to South Africa has been an issue, but I don’t see any posts about it. I know it’s not a Shengin (sp?) country, BUT – has anyone had any experiences with flying from the US (Specifically Los Angeles?) to South Africa? How is it to travel to? It’s for work and the people I would be with do not know my registrant status, so im terrified they could stop me. Any info is much appreciated, thank you!

@LA Guy – Sorry to hear your South Africa travel dilemma. I don’t recall anyone posting or mentioning SA in any posts. On one hand, South Africa is slightly aligned with the Netherlands (who do allow entry) and somewhat liberal for Africa. On the other hand, it’s conceivable no Registrant has ever attempted travel to SA and as you can search these postings on the ‘Green Notices’ sent, they are quite inflammatory with titles of “CAUTION”, “ALERT” and “THREAT”. Immigration officials seeing such a notice for the first time (vs many in Schengen countries) would probably be quite alarmed…

A subjective opinion: Unless you can offer a good reason for being denied entry and if your job may be at stake, I would think of any reason you can to avoid traveling. Even a “day of departure” emergency may be better/safer. (Search for the work related traveler to Kenya who was recently denied entry. I believe he even had a visa or asked immigration prior to travel(?) )

You can be reasonably assured a Green Notice will be sent to South Africa immigration. Again, sorry for these unnecessary issues. Please keep us updated and good luck.

Used to go to Canada on vacation, but haven’t since conviction. There’s a form on this website called Rehabilitation for Persons Who Are Inadmissible to Canada Because of Past Criminal Activity, under Resources/International Travel. Has anyone done that? Looks like I would qualify under number years since conviction, etc. but somewhere I read that sex offenses are not eligible for rehabilitation (figures). Has anyone done this — successfully? Did you use the form or hire a lawyer to handle it (form is very long and complicated)? If a lawyer, can you recommend someone?

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x