ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (10/16 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

We have emailed a link to the conference videos to all attendees and those who purchased the videos. If you haven’t received it and it is not in your spam folder, email

conference at all4consolaws dot org


General NewsInternational Travel

Survey – International Travel after IML

If you have traveled to a foreign country after President Obama signed HR 515 / International Megan’s Law into law on February 8, 2016, please complete this survey to help gather details about the effects of this legislation. We will also share this data with the RTAG group for incorporation into their travel matrix. Thank you.

Go to International Travel Survey

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

For all those who are concerned or frustrated with Angel Watch green notices, may I suggest that you make a Freedom of Information Act request to the Department of Homeland Security and ask them what information they have that pertains to you and what information is being sent out from the Angel Watch unit. I am currently awaiting their response to my FOIA request.


Any response yet?

@Mike G.

Any response yet?

Hi PK and Mike G: Any response? Well, yes, sort of…. I received an email confirming receipt of my FOIA request and notifying me that they are backlogged on FOIA requests so their reply would be delayed. So, no, no full reply yet. I will gladly keep you posted.
In the meantime, I have just re-applied for my new, personally inscribed U.S. passport which should arrive in 6 weeks.
Woo-hoo. 🙄

(As I hear more & more about the Trump Administration’s response to subpoenas, it occurs to me that I should have simply held onto my unmarked passport and – in Trump-like fashion – told DHS to shove their revokation letter up their bureaucratic backside!!)

Hi again, PK and Mike G., I checked online on the status of my FOIA Request to Angel Watch/Department of Homeland Security:
“Request Number: 2019-ICFO-######
Received Date: 03/29/2019
Request Status: Assigned
Estimated Delivery Date: 05/01/2019
Closed Date: __?__
Status information is current as of 05/22/2019”

Hmmm, “Estimated delivery: 05/01” ….. and today is 05/22 …. wow, exactly how thick is my file??!! 😎


Maybe they deliver by Pony Express to save money 😉

So for those of you that get your passport revoked I would highly recommend paying the expedited fee to replace it. Here’s my story: applied for standard processing about 12 weeks ago. No updates online for 10 weeks except it was being processed. Called yesterday to check what was taking so long and she recommended paying the expedited fee. So I figured I’d give that a shot. Guess what? Passport mailed today. $160 processing fee and $76 expedited fee. This was for a revoked passport that had 5 years left on it. I guess it’s all about the benjamins.

@290 air-
I’m in same boat as you… just starting process.
Which form did you start with the ds-82 (mailed one) or one of the others. Did you have a passport card?

@JM from wi, PK, and David
I started with the DS-82 form, but they quickly told me i needed the DS-11 form since it was revoked I was not applying for renewal. My new passport did have the mark. Like I said before I think it’s best to pay for the expedited fee. Did it as standard processing and it was still being processed after 12 weeks. Called in an upgraded, yes you can do that, they take your credit card info over the phone, and it was approved the next day when i checked online. Received it about a week after that.

Thanks for the info. I’ll do the DS11 Did you have a card and turn it in too? I’m tempted to keep mine. I doubt they’ll send it back. & I will obviously not get a new one. Also did you send info about your registry position to them?


Did your new expedited passport have the mark?

I just applied for my personally inscribed passport this weekend. Had to do it in person. I was told it should take 6 – 8 weeks. I think the fee was $110 with an additional $35 going to the in-person processing office (in my case, a local public library).
And like you, 290 air, my revoked passport was still good for several more years.

I just had mine revoked. Can you give me the procedure to get my new one?
Did you take a photo copy of your old one, fill out a DS-64?
It’s confusing since I had one but technically it wasn’t lost or stolen.

I would like to apply ASAP for my new passport.

Help appreciated.


One of the folks here who had theirs revoked should be able to help, but there’s a lot already written here in this thread discussing how to do it, e.g. pay for expedited processing, returning it with what form, etc

How long did you have left on it before it was to expire? What triggered it to be revoked, e.g. overseas travel just completed, etc? Understanding your situation could help others here who have had theirs revoked.

Just did mine- am waiting for marked one
Use form DS 11 – You have to go into post office in person. Need new pic. To fill out form online, is difficult because the online automatic form filler does not ask the question “is your passport revoked” so it sends you to another form. Also no one I spoke with (I called all the #s) knew what to tell me. Got all the help here. I pd. all the expedited charges in hopes it will arrive in JULY. It took my friend with all expedited fees +/- 2 months. I suppose he threw them a curve ball by sending it in before it was revoked.

Just as a further note to my above post. I put in my application on the 11th. (expedited). Got the marked passport on the 27th.
ALSO when applying with a revoked passport you must use other ID’s besides the revoked passport!!!


Read this forum thread on what you need to know on a new marked passport:

I have debated posting this comment because it might do more harm than good , I am also an RSO , I come from a family of “Preppers” but not truly serious . I hear much from the Political turmoil and talk of rebellion insurrection and civil war I am overhearing some Militias saying that if the scenario of societal collapse should happen referred to as a SHTF ( Shit Hits The Fan) moment combined with a WOLF (With Out Law enForcement) moment that their first action would be to search out RSOs for elimination , the comments heard are like this , ” The first thing we do is down load the Megans List that will give us the names , addresses and photograghs of the sex offenders , we could take them out easily as the wont be armed as ex felons” I don’t want to provoke any fear but being on Megans list could be a true death sentence if those 2 moments were to happen .

With the way the government has provided so much military equipment to every community, I doubt that there is much of a chance for vigilante groups to take control. Most police departments are well stocked with equipment they are eager to use. And counting on any felon not to have a gun to defend themselves just because it’s prohibited is just foolish. Yes, most felons won’t have a gun, but some will, so would you bet your life no one could fight back? Felons are arrested daily with guns and other illegal weapons.

While I do believe we are in for a major economic collapse at some point, I doubt it will end up in anarchy. That said, if it does, this ex-felon will be well armed and protected. Just because I can not possess firearms while all things are peaceful, does not mean I did not make preparations for if SHTF.

@ Roy L.,
#1. I truly doubt our still decent Country will get to such a collapse of American society just because of federal government bureaucratic turmoil & stupidity.
#2. While a “guest of the State”, I often heard the rumor that, if the U.S. was ever attacked by a foreign country, there was a top secret law mandating that all prison inmates be immediately executed.

Don’t sip the Kool-Aid and don’t encourage or listen to the crazy talk.

“if the U.S. was ever attacked by a foreign country, there was a top secret law mandating that all prison inmates be immediately executed. ” Yes, that bit of inmate disinfo has been going around for decades. I heard it almost thirty years ago. I’ve yet to see any evidence of it. Just another scary story told while smoking Bugler rollies around the campfire.

@ Notorious D.I.K.: “…smoking Bugler rollies around the campfire.”
😄 Haha! Love your turn of phrase! Thanks for the chuckle!

The campfire, of course, is of the San Quentin Reception Center variety; a wad of toilet paper. Ever had a S’more made over burning toilet paper?

So, it appears that this page is back to being where International Travel is discussed. I thought we were all supposed to move comments to INT. TRAVEL 2019, but I know that I am unable to access comments on that page. Is that the same with everyone else, or just me?

In any case, there has been concern expressed that ANGEL WATCH may be closely monitoring these travel pages. If that is the case, I guess we should NOT discuss any country to which we have been successful entering, for fear that ANGEL WATCH will put pressure on (or pay money to) those countries to work harder to prevent us from entering.

By the same token, we should NOT discuss our successes or lack of problems when traveling with our new Scarlet Letter passports for fear that ANGEL WATCH will greatly enhance their efforts to inform the world to watch out for our passports.

For me, that pretty much eliminates the reasons for having these international pages until someone figures out a way to make the posts private. I don’t know how you could do that for very long unless you used some sort of face recognition software so only RCs with mugshots in some SO database would be allowed access. Even that would probably not keep ANGEL WATCH out for long – someone would sell out… 🙁

Geeze, Mike, you are one of the most respected voices here and I hate like heck to disagree with you on this…but I really fear…the very natural paranoia that lives in most of us, (with good reason, they are often out to get us….lol), has gotten the best of you.

Angel Watch monitoring these pages? I don’t think so, but even if so….they or anyone reading these pages can only come to the conclusion…of what really decent people we are. Maybe they will feel ashamed for what they are doing; if not, openness, the clear light of day in all of our actions is our best defense.

Most of us, me included, tend to hide in the shadows as much as we can…yet, we are now reaching critical mass…almost a million of us across the USA, a hundred thousand plus here in California, could wield actual political influence if not power itself were we to stick together and speak with one voice and often…out in the open.

Sigh…I don’t particularly trust our society…I don’t see how they could be more punitive than they are being already….though God knows since this involves sex they never will stop trying….we must, (imo) begin to live in the open….unashamed.

(a secret, I don’t feel particularly bad for what I did, I saw it then as a terrible and misguided mistake (and certainly one never to be repeated!)…but at the same time not particularity wrong or unnatural. Who I really feel sorry for are the non-contact, picture or internet sting people…they are suffering much more a total injustice than even I (imo)).

Lastly, let me circle back, this is one of the few places where we can get honest information. We cannot abandon this coming together for any reason.

Best Wishes, James I

@James I

Thanks for your kind words and your optimism!
But I have been informed that my comments have put the travel plans of others in jeopardy, and I certainly don’t want to do that.
I do have more international travel planned, but I think I will just be quiet about it. Unless, of course, something goes bad, which I will then be sure to report.

I wish I knew who really is monitoring these pages, but I’m afraid for now it’s not worth the risk.

I think that I have to push back on this idea of going quiet on travel issues. There may well be some particular instances where I would advise not advertising certain facts, e.g. which country might actually accept us for residency status (although I’ve yet to learn of one) or perhaps some hidden loopholes discovered by chance that makes our travel lives easier, but to no longer report successful entries into countries out of fear that Angel Watch will take corrective action? I think that’s a mistake. For one thing, this forum was the first resource and is still almost the only resource for travel information for registrants. It has great value, not only for US but as documentation of the injustice represented by IML and Angel Watch. That means it is important for journalists and lawyers, etc., too in strengthening our cause. That’s the important long game. I agree that it would be awful if it augments the nefarious project that is Angel Watch but I’m skeptical that that is a natural outcome of making this information public.

I’m certainly not arguing that we shouldn’t be absolutely cynical about the extent to which our government goes to subvert freedom but I also know that they are incredibly ineffectual in most efforts to extend their franchise through intelligence gathering or, in this case shifting foreign governments’ policies in immigration issues that are not obviously to the benefit of that foreign government. Those countries that DO care a great deal about what the U.S. has to say in such matters are probably already blocking our entrance into their countries.

So, I think that the good of continuing to publish these travel reports outweighs the (remote) bad in doing so.

I agree with you, James, even if this issue is a bit of a conundrum. All other things being equal, we should prefer the obvious benefits of stating what is true over concealing them on the highly theoretical basis that they might have consequences. There is also the consequence that, by not revealing this information, and apart from the loss of important information which we need to live our lives, that doing so helps to conceal our suffering from public scrutiny. Documentation is an important aspect of confrontation.

I agree w/@NDIK on this and not hiding the good travel info behind membership portals, etc. If they’re going to watch, they’ll do it regardless however they want. I’m watching, listening, and learning with what travel info is shared here and an grateful for it. The fight for travel rights will continue. Sharing with others here is too valuable to not share. Be selective if you want of what you share, but also petition the USG for data that’s yours.

If anyone wanted to find out what countries to add to the “no RC list”, wouldn’t it be easier to go to RTAG? Why spend time reading all the comments and tangents on here, when it’s nicely charted over there?


I agree that RTAG should be the best option, but it doesn’t seem to be maintained. I turned in filled out USER SUBMITTED travel reports on two countries I visited last year, but neither of them are on RTAG. I fear mentioning them in case they were left off on purpose, or maybe they require multiple reports before adding – I don’t know. This September I have trips planned to (I’m now nervous about mentioning any countries, but…) Turkey and Croatia, neither of which are on RTAG. It would be helpful if they added another couple of hundred countries to the list with a disclaimer like: No reports yet, or insufficient information, or something. Or maybe a disclaimer at the bottom of the matrix saying: “Some countries we left off the list because we don’t want the word to get out that RCs have been able to visit for fear this will have negative consequences.”

@JM of wi
I didn’t have a passport card to turn in. Not sure what you mean on my registry position. Seems like they have all the info that they need pertaining to that. My is expunged so seems like the verbiage “has been convicted of an offense against a minor” goes against what my expungement paperwork says. what a bunch of yaccoffs..

@290 air Thanks- A friend sent his criminal conviction info along with his passport renewal. He felt it his DOC contact told him to enclose proof he needed a SO stamp. (his passport was not revoked) — he was afraid of having it revoked while out of country/at boarding of plane.

Just dropped off my 21 day travel itinerary. Registration was closed but officer walking in gladly took it gave me his card and wrote time, date my name itinerary dropped off signed it and gave it back to me. He asked me where I was going and said have a good time.

@AJ and others

My conviction has just been overturned, set aside, and vacated by an appellate court. My question is I’m no longer required to register and no longer have any conviction. I know I no longer fall under the passport portion of the law but will angel watch still send out a green notice?

No…but…I wouldn’t be surprised if Angel Watch screws it up the first time you travel and then realize their mistake after they’ve screwed your travel plans. Only way to find out is travel.

First and most importantly: Congratulations! Apparently some wisdom came into play and someone saw the railroading you received. I’m so happy for you.

As for AW and messages, they *shouldn’t* because there’s no criminal record. As @steve touches on, they may screw it up. Hopefully not. IIRC, you’re in the NE. Maybe you can test the waters by trying to drive into Canada. That would probably be the most reliable way to see what info the US has and/or shares, given Canada is part of 5 Eyes.

Congrats! 🎉

I’d say just travel and if they did, sue the living hell out of them and take them for everything.

@NY won’t let go

I completely agree, but I thought government agencies were immune from lawsuits…

Does anyone know what the laws are for entry into Dominican Republic?

Has anyone tried walking into Mexico? Just wondering.

Just out of curiosity, if I paid for a 10-year-passport, and it still has 5 years left on it, then even if they force me to get a marked passport, why should I have to pay for a new one? If I already paid for the next 5 years, then that means they owe me a 5-year passport, without charge.


No because the passport is not yours but still official government property being given to you to use as you can. It needs to be returned to them at their request regardless of how much time is left on the passport. That would include any updating of the passport to include language on the back page. As we have discussed here previously, you don’t have to use the passport and don’t have to travel overseas. If you want to and are covered by United States code for a marked passport, then you have to get such passport regardless how much time is left and they’re not going to give you the monetary difference.

Of course the U.S. federal criminal regime (USFCR) should have to pay 100% of the cost for any screwing around with a passport that has not expired. That or just leave it alone. They should at least try to stop being total morons as well and recognize that no one is paying attention to their Scarlet Letter marking on the passports. The marking is doing nothing. They can just keep having Satan Watch send out their notices and that will stop people from traveling, as the USFCR intends.

Complete aside – I was reading about “sovereign citizens” earlier today (in Popular Mechanics of all places!). I think that concept is 100% wrong. But, what gives the USFCR any say at all about where I, a person who is not on probation or parole, travel or how? F*ck them every day. Anyone (other than a different country) who thinks they should be able to tell me when and where I travel is an enemy combatant in war. They should be treated as any terrorist it treated.

But, make no mistake, I do think the USFCR should have a say in how our citizens travel internationally for various reasons. But it cannot be just because they hate “$EX offenders” and want to play make-believe nanny state.

Yes, the passport remains in the possession of the US Government. No one is disputing that. And no, I do not have to get a passport and use it to travel internationally, but once I do….

An analogy if I may…..

I certainly do not need to rent a car but I chose to do so, and I go to Alamo or Enterprise and I rent a car, pre-paid, for one week, as that is the only way I get the keys, and then on Wednesday Alamo or Enterprise asks me to return the car because of a company policy that changed during my rental period. Said corporate guideline requires all rental locations to add a label to the vehicle’s airbags or something like that. Do I not get a replacement vehicle (properly marked) for the rest of my week? Am I not entitled to a prorated refund should such a replacement not be dispensed? Does Alamo or Enterprise get to recall my rental car without recompense for the rest of my pre-paid rental period?

How is the passport any different? The government could require a new label on the product they “rent” to me every week and pocket my entire 10 year “rental” fee. Keeping in mind they have a complete monopoly on the product and offer no flexible rental periods. That seems unamerican…..

“No because the passport is not yours but still official government property being given to you to use as you can. It needs to be returned to them at their request regardless of how much time is left on the passport.”

Yet, when I applied for a passport and met the requirements for a marked passport, I got an unmarked passport. I applied as I thought I’d be getting off the registry soon (I won’t). So, they issued me a passport against the requirements and I will have to pay for their “mistake” when I apply again with time still available on my current passport? Sounds like a scam to me.

@R M

Sounds like it’s time to use your elected officials in Washington DC from your home state to help rectify this error they made so you do not have to pay twice for what they should have provided originally.

@TS: lol, you’re too funny. I’m not the only one.

@Will Allen & Buster S

I am in agreement with both of your replies in principle because I think it’s a shady practice.

However, I will follow that up with a suspended or revoked driver’s license analogy as well since we all pay a fee to have that little plastic card, marked or not depending on your state of residency. Should an individual also be refunded their suspended or revoked driver’s license fee duration commensurate with what they paid? Should they be just given a new ID card in place of the suspended or revoked driver’s license gratis? Should those who live in states that currently mark driver’s licenses and ID cards also be refunded their part of the initial fee before they had to receive a marked driver’s license or ID card?

Should those who have to turn in their passports because they’ve been deemed flight risks or are in the position to be potentially deemed a flight risk or those who have tax issues that the state department, at request of the IRS, revoked their passports for also be refunded the fee pro rated to the amount of time their passports have been removed from their possession?

Passports, driver’s licenses, and state ID cards are all in the same vein since they’re government provided via a fee for the people to use and have in their possession.

As we have discussed here previously, overseas travel is a right, as well as getting a driver’s license is, but that does not necessarily mean you’re going to get the ability to exercise it without government paid for documents without government due diligence based on laws of the land.

I will debate the Alamo rental car situation because that’s a for profit entity. Alamo would face recourse from the consumer if they pulled that stunt and did not backfill accordingly with a new rental car. The US Gov’t is not for profit but maybe they should face recourse anyway. You could challenge this in court, but I’d imagine the court would tell you that’s just part of the pain and suffering one must monetarily pay for the ability to live life in a way that they want to live. There may even be court precedent already on this.

Most of your examples are poor analogies as in these cases
– suspended / revoked drivers license (do drivers licenses get revoked?)
– tax delinquencies
– no fly list (why would a person on the no fly list have to relinquish their passport?)
the revocation is based on current, active and qualifying conduct by the document holder. Revocation of an otherwise perfectly valid passport in the IML world is based strictly on rules implemented by the issuing agency which technically owns the document. Apples and Oranges.

“Should those registrants who live in states that currently mark driver’s licenses and ID cards also be refunded their part of the initial fee before they had to receive a marked driver’s license or ID card?” – Abso-freaking-lutely. If I understand correctly, and they were forced to replace an active and current document strictly due to a guideline / law implemented by the issuing agency.

It is true that the rental car example involves a private company. But do not both scenarios involve a contract? Once the State Dept (or whoever issues the passport) cashes my check do they not enter into a contract with me and owe me document for my financial consideration unless my application is denied for insufficient documentation – which does not apply in the case of a revoked passport as it, by definition, had to be based on acceptable documentation? Otherwise they could just cash my check and give me neither a passport nor a denial with cause.

Like you say, someone has to challenge this in court. Until such time we can yap here until we are blue in the face.

@Buster S

The premise of my examples is all involve a wrong doing in the eyes of the USG where passports can be removed from the owner and thus not allowed to be used despite the fee with no refund of the time not in hand. I do see what you are saying WRT issuing agency rules.

You send in money with your passport application to the State Dept. This means you could be denied a passport if they do not approve you for whatever reason (more than just insufficient docs) and not refunded your application fee (to my knowledge), much like you would with any application and fee. (If anyone has been denied a passport and been refunded their fee with the denial, then someone please say so because I would believe that would be a first in this forum on this topic and ever our US Gov’t giving money back for denying something regardless.)

As for Alamo, they could pull the rental from out under the customer due to conduct detrimental to their vehicle at the hands of the renter and not provide a refund. That would be inline with the USG revoking a covered person’s passport which is not marked because detrimental conduct was involved. (Highly simplified for the sake of discussion)

I also agree with you on the DL discussion, but wanted to see where you stood (which I figured already based on your thoughts above but did not assume).

Has anyone successfully traveled to Brasil without being turned back and sent home?

If you fly into Brazil you will likely be turned around.
If you arrive by cruise ship, you likely will get in, but you would be restricted by the cruise line to it’s ports and excursions. If you tried to go out on your own, the cruise line would report you to local authorities for not returning to the ship.

Also, you should ask your question again on the INT. TRAVEL 2020 page, link at the top of this page.

1 5 6 7
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x