ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings [details]
November 2018 Call Audio
, 12/08 – San Diego

Emotional Support Group: (Los Angeles) 11/24, 12/22 [details]

Registration Laws for all 50 States

General News

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

Join the discussion

  1. Major Henderson

    Question for anyone who knows the answer: Concerning the travel form we are required to fill out for international trips, is the form the same at all police stations throughout the US, or does each police station make its own?
    And, if standard, what information is required? Cities or countries or also hotels?

  2. Travel Update

    It’s been 24 days since I returned from Europe trip and still no revocation letter. Will be traveling for work within next month or so, so hopefully no issues with passport. So still hard to figure out what government is doing (or not doing). I did give the 21-day notice. Slipped through the cracks with this trip? Targeting only certain tiers or crimes? Who knows…

    On another note, looks like government did charge someone for failing to notify in July 2018. Clearly this guy was asking for trouble… https://www.smart.gov/smartwatch/july2018/case-spotlight.html

    • jo

      It’s coming. Sadly, it’s coming.

      It’s been over 30 days for me and yep, the lovely yellow envelope arrived yesterday. Consider me revoked.

    • AD from MN

      I returned from Europe on June 18. Received my letter last Monday, it was dated July 30th. (6 weeks from my return). I would be careful.

      • Travel Update

        It’s been over 6 weeks since my return from Europe and I travel in about a week back for work. Still no revocation letter. I’m worried will get one in the next few days and then lose my client because I can’t travel to meetings that have been setup. Fingers crossed.

        BTW – found this piece thought some of you might be interested (if you haven’t seen before): IML – It’s not about what works. It’s about what sells. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323308904_International_Megan's_Law_It's_not_about_what_works_it's_about_what_sells

        • @ Travel Update

          Did you make your second trip? Did your passport ever get revoked?

        • Travel Update

          I’ve done a couple trips since, giving notice, even with last minute changes. No revocation letter yet and no major issues. One time when returning in secondary, they called registration office after asking my trip details – my trip was shortened so assume this is why (and I did inform registration office by voicemail). So far so good, but so stressful to travel, but when you have to in order to earn a living and provide for family… It’s going to be a very long year before my registration finally expires. This is absolutely punishment, not administrative. I just wish there was more court action, but understand need to proceed cautiously.

  3. David Kennerly's Government-Driven Life

    “Clearly this guy was asking for trouble.” Well, perhaps he simply didn’t know. Ignorance of the law? Does that even matter for us? Thanks for your travel reports. I’m afraid that my career has already ended because of the travel notifications and I’m unwilling to renew my now-expired passport for one with the government’s crimson letter upon it. I just assume that my once-fabulous days of foreign travel are behind me.

    • Travel Update

      Did you read the article? States he was told numerous times (he probably even had to sign a form stating his knowledge). That said, wish you wouldn’t give up…

      • David Kennerly's Government-Driven Life

        Yes, I see that the government says that he was notified “numerous times” by them. And the “article” is, of course, written by that government. From experience, I’m not willing to believe anything they say, however. I haven’t given up on fighting IML but I’m not, at this moment, terribly hopeful or as hopeful as I once was, that IML is going away anytime soon. In part, this is due to lawyers on our side who have expressed pessimism that it can be defeated on a constitutional basis. I think that this makes its successful challenge contingent upon a much longer term project, the challenge of the Registry, itself. I also think that an IML challenge should include a group formed specifically to fight it and which represents the interests of all who are affected by it and not one willing to accommodate the interests of the government.

    • PK

      @David you should have split when you had the opportunity.

    • Forever marked

      I hear you and feel you! Travelling was my true joy. It is how I found real friends and realized how completely messed up this country is. Now I have to live here until I can afford to leave. I literally am at war with the U.S. I cheer for all the crap that is happening because it will help bring down this place. I am willing to go down too if it helps end this farse.

  4. Steveo

    David,

    Per your refusing to travel with the crimson letter… I’d rethink it.

    • Matt

      David …. over the years I have appreciated your comments … thank you. I would be interested to see the statement placed in our passports. Would anyone who has it be willing to post it for everyone to view? Thanks

  5. David

    @ David K: Stop traveling? Not at all! If anything, I would take every opportunity I could to travel internationally, because as soon as I arrive at another Countries port of entry and I get harassed, refused entry,et etc, that will form the basis for the next lawsuit against IML!

    • PK

      I wonder if the previous 2 IML Lawsuit dismissals will set a negative precedent and make it even harder to challenge IML in the future.

  6. David

    @ PK: I don’t believe the two previous lawsuit’ outcomes will set a precedent for future lawsuits. The first lawsuit was dismissed because the judge felt that because IML had not yet been implemented, no parties had yet been injured. I suppose that’s a reasonable argument. As for the second lawsuit, it was very specific, regarding the failure of the State Department to follow administrative protocol that is required of them. However it was the judge’s belief that the protocol was not sidestepped or was not relevant.

  7. AD from MN

    GOT THE LETTER – if everyone remembers, I traveled to Europe (France, Germany, & Switzerland) in June without one issue. Didn’t even have a secondary upon return to ATLANTA.

    We returned on June 18th and I received the CERTIFIED LETTER from STATE DEPARTMENT on August 6th. The letter was dated July 30th (6 weeks after my return).

    Angry is not even remotely how I feel…especially given the media/government attention given to illegals…UGH!

    • E

      Sorry, but thanks for the confirmation. That one dude working on this at state must be getting backlogged now.

    • Bob N

      How come we stopped fighting against IML?Lets write petitions,go to DC, find competing lawyers for civil rights,and etc.Why we say Okay to have mark in the passport,coming back from foreign countries because government keeping sending letters that we are coming for the child sex tourism.Thats why which country will want these people.
      That’s do something,please

  8. Ron

    Have any expats had thier passport revoked after visiting the USA and returning to thier current country?

    • PK

      @Ron,

      I think the question should be:

      Have any Expats had their Passport revoked after returning to the United States for a visit, and then not be able to return back to their new found Country?

  9. Alexander Rodrigues

    I would also like to have a compiled list of countries you can travel to with the new red identifiers

  10. Malibu

    I still don’t understand how are government ever did this, and how it isn’t a constitution issue?
    I was released from 1 year county jail in 1987. I was able to travel freely since then until IML passed. So almost 30 years. Then they get to add this? Plus AWA that I can no longer marry / sponsor a foreign national? New restrictions keep coming. I just want to retire and move out of the USA.
    I no longer feel free, or safe. Crime free for over 30 years, who cares….

    • Major Henderson

      Same here. Crime free for over 30 years, active in the community, philanthropist. Yet more restrictions on my life every year. Just cannot be constitutional, at least as it was originally conceived.

    • David Kennerly's Government-Driven Life

      I had been off of government “supervision” for more than two decades when I found that I was no longer able to travel. I had traveled widely and frequently since getting off of parole (and even a bit while on parole), built a business that depended on my ability to travel abroad and on short notice (I once traveled to Taipei to deliver two electric generators to our production facility the day after a major earthquake knocked-out power to much of the island). Now I can’t even get into Taiwan nor, it would seem, any other country in Asia (with the exception of Hong Kong, apparently) where I could once visit with customers, tour their facilities and exhibit at trade exhibitions. I’ve gone from having my liberty largely restored immediately following parole, and for many years, to having it curtailed again two decades later as if I were suddenly back on parole. How is it that that has managed to become a manifestly unjust hardship that cannot be effectively challenged in court?

      • PK

        @David,

        It could be challenged, but it would require a lot of resources.

        • Hysteria

          It won’t be challenged. We don’t have a voice in our corner. Oh sure, we might “win” a residency restriction every blue moon, but REAL progress? Come on…………….

      • Caregiving Public Servant

        First of all, I enjoy reading your posts as they are all filled with good insights and perspectives. Do not stop traveling internationally, otherwise you will allow a Nazi controlled government to conquer control of you. What is happening now in the United States against people with a sex related conviction is unprecedented and a disgrace, but you really must keep fighting. Do not ever give up, David! I would like to suggest two options for you:

        1. Do whatever it takes to file a lawsuit against IML now, even if you have to do it yourself. Just file the lawsuit. Try not to think too deeply into things, but just focus on fighting against IML for as long as it takes. However, do not only rely on a lawsuit as a means to an end right now. You will need to do much more.

        2. Seek political asylum in a foreign country because you are being hurt by a Nazi government. If you don’t receive asylum in the first country, then try another country.

        You will have to take risks to fight for your freedom. That involves resisting oppressive sex offender laws, telling Nazi supporting police “No”, and doing whatever it takes to escape Nazi control. Essentially, you may need to break uncivil sex offender laws to stand up for your human rights. The reality here is that you are going to have to be a soldier and refugee to obtain freedom. You never have to subject yourself to Nazi pseudoscience and being shamed by your government. Just don’t give up. Fight aggressively!

      • J

        @David Unless you have actually been denied entry to Taiwan, why do you think you are unable to enter Taiwan? And why do you think you can only travel to Hong Kong? What makes Hong Kong different from anywhere else? If you can enter Hong Kong, you should be able to enter other countries too. If I were you, I would be persistent on meeting with your US Senators and Representative to ensure that you can lawfully travel with no problem, but I would also advise you to take your issue to court as your constitutional rights are being violated. It should be a no-brainer for the court to know that the federal government cannot control where you travel. In the event that you are not successful in court or with your congressmen, I would say run for the border even if it involves sneaking out of the country to protect your rights.

        • NY won't let go

          It could be that Taiwan has denied others from entering due to the green notices.
          But the thing is Taiwan is the major hub for sex workers and human trafficking over here already. So I’m not quite sure what they are trying to prevent by people just coming on holiday when you have body runners coming in and out every day.

      • jd

        Yes, I don’t understand why a case like yours couldn’t be used to show that the registry is in fact PUNITIVE.

  11. David Kennerly's Government-Driven Life

    He could only issue a pardon for federal charges, such as child porn. Now is he going to? Uh, no.

  12. Major Henderson

    I went to the Houston police to fill out my travel itinerary today and was told by several people that I was way too early. They only want you to fill it out 5 days before your trip. I told them I had read that it was supposed to be done 21 days out, and they said that is when you are supposed to make an appointment with the agent. She is on vacation, so they said to call her in a week.
    This stuff just drives me up the wall.

    • Hysteria

      You have to realize that we know WAY more about our supposed limitations than government agencies. They are there not to act, but to react! We are an inconvenience to most law enforcement agencies. They use us as practice for harassment, searches, and community relations.

    • R M

      Who cares what “they” think. I don’t. Cover your own ass, at least 21 days has no maximum time.

    • TS

      @Maj Henderson

      Have to agree with R M here and CYA regardless of what they say. If they won’t do an in person notification until later than 21 days out, send it via USPS mail with tracking, certified, or registered to the person who you need to make an appt with to fulfill the national law of them being notified at least 21 days out. Keep two paper copies of all that with you (one on your person and another in the luggage) and maybe a scanned copy of it all either on your phone or in the cloud for retrieval later if needed. They may look at your weirdly, but as long as you CYA here with the Feds, let’em look at your weirdly. TX may think at times they are their own country, but last I checked, they are not.

      • Major Henderson

        It was already too late to meet the 21 day deadline. I just did what the officer requested and called back when she was back in the office. She instructed me to come in the Friday preceding the Monday of my departure to fill out the papers. They seem to be cutting it as short as possible. I have no idea why. But, as has been pointed out repeatedly, they probably don’t know what they are doing, but what other choice do we have?

    • AJ

      @Major Henderson:
      “they said that [21 days out] is when you are supposed to make an appointment with the agent.”
      —–
      1) If they’re wrong, who suffers? Who perhaps is stopped at the gate by USMS? Who risks prison?
      2) They are wrong, as Fed. Law, via AG guidelines, says the RC must provide info 21 days ahead. If the State chooses to exercise its 10th Amdt. rights and ignore the 21-day guidelines, so be it. Were I you, I’d get the agent’s name, and then mail a certified copy to her.

  13. Malibu

    We can’t just travel to countries to see if we get in, if we can’t, they detain and send back on next flight at our expense. Also, if trying to go to Philippines, they not just send you back but put you on a black list for life, so without a lawyer you will never get in.
    This is without a doubt, unusual punishment, and also cruel. SCOTUS needs to grow some balls and put a stop to it. Instead of just sitting back and watching. I heard one of them actually said people only travel to the Philippines to have sex with children. I am sure that view is the same for all of Asia.
    When I was first on the registry in 1987 I was not restricted. Now every day more restrictions are added. I should at least be able to face my accusers, and defend myself. But even that no longer is allowed.

  14. Ron

    So what happens if your mom dies in her home country and you can only give 7 days notice? Does the government prohibit emergency travel?

    • TS

      @Ron

      There’s wiggle room for these types of events in the 2011 AG SORNA direction given to the states. Notify with the specifics you normally would (state and federal rules (smart.gov) apply here) then possibly also provide proof of her passing with details. If possible, please report back here with the travel notification and actual travel experiences please.

      • Anonymouse

        Again you insist on applying 2011 guidelines directed at states about to modify their laws to a 2016 law directed at individuals having to comply with said law. Seriously! I certainly hope that no one believes you to the tune of 10 years in Federal Prison.

        34 U.S. Code § 20914: “A sex offender *shall* provide and update information required under subsection (a), including information relating to intended travel outside the United States.”

        https://smart.gov/pdfs/SORNAFinalSuppGuidelines01_11_11.pdf 2011 SORNA Final Guidelines:

        “The authority under 42 U.S.C. 16914(a)(7) to expand the range of required registration information is accordingly exercised to provide that registrants *must* be required to inform their residence jurisdictions of intended travel outside of the United States *at least 21 days in advance* of such travel.” (p. 1637)

        “While notice of international travel will generally be required as described above, it is recognized that requiring 21days advance notice may occasionally be unnecessary or inappropriate. For example, a sex offender may need to travel abroad unexpectedly because of a family or work emergency. Or separate advance notice of intended international trips may be unworkable and pointlessly burdensome for a sex offender who lives in a northern border state and commutes to Canada for work on a daily basis. *Jurisdictions* that wish to accommodate such situations should include information about their policies or practices in this area in their submissions to the SMART Office and the SMART Office will determine whether they adequately serve SORNA’s international tracking objectives. (p. 1638)

        Unless a state / tribe / territory formalizes their policies and procedures to address this, there is no, zero, wiggle room for the 21 day advance notice on an individual level as far as internationally traveling registrants are concerned. None.

        This provision does not necessarily criminalize travel, but certainly criminalizes spontaneous travel.

        Further, the actual law (34 U.S. Code § 20914, and reiterated in the guidelines above) reads: “A sex offender shall provide and update information required under subsection (a), including information relating to *intended* travel outside the United States.”

        What is “intended travel”? When do you *intend* to travel? When you check in at the airport? When you step on the plane? When you buy a ticket? When you schedule an overseas business meeting for next month? When you wake up one morning and think, Tahiti for Christmas this year?

        How can the failure to report an *intention* be a crime?

  15. Mike G

    @Ron

    That is an excellent question. I have heard no discussions about any “emergency” provisions or what might constitute an emergency.

    On the other side, I haven’t heard of any penalty for giving notice and then not traveling.

    If my mom in a foreign country were seriously ill and could go any time, I would start sending a 21 day notice of travel every day. As long as she made it for the next 21 days, then when you did have to travel, you would just take a copy of the notice you’d sent 21 days earlier, showing you arriving on the date that you will actually travel.

    Granted, this would eventually totally enrage whoever you were sending the notices to, but unless it was illegal, the worst they could do would be toss your new notice in the trash every day. But you would have your copy with delivery confirmation that you could take with you to CYA.

    All of this stuff is so damn stupid, unfair, and unconstitutional, but no one cares other than us, so maybe all you can do is try to out-bureaucrat the bureaucrats.

    • David Kennerly's Government-Driven Life

      No, they do claim that they can make provisions for exigent circumstances or some such. It’s in there.

      • Anonymouse

        “No, they do claim that they can make provisions for exigent circumstances or some such. It’s in there.”

        Who does? And where is it in?

        • TS

          @Anonymouse

          Where you ask? You have it right in front of you, the very section of the Fed Register which the AG used to supplement the SORNA law giving the exceptions to the 21 day part of the law. (You could get the GPO copy if you prefer online too.) The 2016 law refers back to the 2011 AG supplement guidelines which refers to 2008 SORNA. That is how many laws work, they refer to previous laws and either supersede them entirely/by section with new laws/sections or incorporate the previous laws for implementation with legal notes embedded within. 2016 IML incorporates 2008 SORNA which was supplemented by the 2011 AG SORNA Guidelines thus making both of them implemented within 2016 law unless specifically called out otherwise for whatever reason deemed necessary.

          Who you ask? The US AG (Eric Holder at the time) did, that is who.

          BTW, it appears you are confusing States vs Feds. If the states have implemented SORNA fully, the exceptions apply. If the states have implemented SORNA partially, then exceptions may apply if they have accepted them. If states have not implemented SORNA at all, then fed law applies unless superseded by state law which would usually require something harsher than the Feds, e.g. greater than 21 days notification. It is the All/Some/None rule where states can receive full SORNA funding, partial, or none depending on their action. Why is this important? Because the states can do as they want when it comes to travel notification, e.g. give no less than 7 days notification even if the Feds want 21 days – meaning you give 21 days notification regardless because it is the greater of the two and meets them both. If a state has not implemented SORNA and has its own Registrant travel notification laws where they specifically call out there are no exceptions, then they can do as they wish and the person may be in a hard place to travel on short notice. However, I’d be hesitant to say the Fed exceptions do not apply to the traveler because the state could be construed with interfering with the freedom of travel (a fundamental right) on such an exception if founded to be needed to be used by the traveler.

          A less than 21 day notification long weekend soiree overseas would be frowned upon since it is not under the exceptions and could be possible trouble with those you are notifying, especially the Feds.

          If you chose to not believe this, that is your choice. As has always been said here, check with your local LE office for further guidance or an atty who will hopefully guide you through the process. I am not an atty and won’t espouse legal advice here, travel related or not.

          As for Ron’ scenario, if mom’s country will keep her on ice until Ron can get there with 21 day notification, great; but if not, he needs to get there in 7 days, and the state is not willing to budge on 21 days, there is a need to talk with the State Dept, consulates, elected officials, etc then for alternate considerations I would think to raise the issue and the exceptions in the Fed Register. What do you have to lose in trying?

        • Anonymouse

          @TS – one more time and then I give up.

          What I have in front of me is an exception afforded to JURISDICTIONS who are modifying their legal code in order to become fully SORNA compliant. If their legal code is to include any deviations / exceptions from the SORNA blueprint the JURISDICTIONS must submit their proposed legal code to the DOJ in order to see if their exceptions are acceptable to the SMART office in their quest for SORNA compliance.

          The whole point of Nichols was that IML elevates the travel notification from a an issue only applying to SORNA compliant jurisdictions to a Federal Law. It IS now a Federal Law -34 U.S. Code § 20914- whose technical details are based on the Supplemental Guidelines in place for technical implementation.

          How you confuse this with your local law cop shop being able to make an exception for Joe Blow’s trip next week to visit his ill mother is beyond me.

          “I am not an atty and won’t espouse legal advice here, travel related or not. ”

          Yet you make the value judgment that “A less than 21 day notification long weekend soiree overseas would be frowned upon since it is not under the exceptions and could be possible trouble with those you are notifying, especially the Feds.” By “frowned upon” you mean a felony offense with up to 10 years in Federal Prison? That is one hell of a frowny face…

          BTW – you are never notifying the Feds. A traveling registrant is to report intended travel at least 21 days in advance to their local registering agency. And we all know how the local cop shop is a great source for reliable legal advice. Especially for federal laws.

          Seems to me you should take your own advice and not espouse legal travel advice here.

        • TS

          @Anonymouse

          As I said earlier, “If you chose to not believe this, that is your choice. As has always been said here, check with your local LE office for further guidance or an atty who will hopefully guide you through the process. I am not an atty and won’t espouse legal advice here, travel related or not.”

          If you are not willing or able to check with your local LE office for further guidance or an atty who will hopefully guide you as to what the state law (with possible exceptions) is possibly based upon federal law (with noted exceptions), then just say it so the rest of us won’t be the wiser with what you could find out from them with your quandary.

          I would notify the feds at 21 days (or just prior should it be a weekend travel start date and had no travel exceptions required) if I was intending to travel overseas with a full intent to attempt such when the time came to travel, e.g. checking-in at the counter, access security, and board (or cross the border via personal vehicle and my passport or passport ID card).

          I will make no judgements as to the frowny face repercussions of the travel situation by those who don’t think well of the person’s attempt to game the system.

          If the fed, state, or both laws are not to your liking, then take it up with elected officials who have the power using words to your liking to convey to the rest of us who may need to know a corrected version of the law.

          Lastly, here is criminal intent from wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intention_(criminal_law)

          Let’s see what you can glean from it for further discussion here.

    • David

      Unfortunately, Mike G., the 21-day notification requires some details (such as airline and flight numbers). Unless you can book, cancel, book, cancel, book, cancel day after day, it would be difficult to maintain a “running”, just-in-case 21-day notification. 😒

      • Mike G

        @David

        You’re right, it would be pretty impractical. You could, though, put down an airline and flight number without actually booking the flight. Just pick a likely one that you would use. If the day came, and you booked the real thing, you could just say you had to change the flight last minute. Angel Watch doesn’t notify based on your 21 day notice anyway; they use the actual flight manifest data, so it wouldn’t change anything with them.

        I wrote this half sarcastically because I have to believe some accommodation would be made for emergencies, but if I was certain my only options were the 10 year mandatory IML prison sentence or missing a parent’s death bed / funeral, I would seriously consider something this drastic.

  16. E

    Hi all: has anyone traveled with a marked passport yet? I’m used to making 3-4 trips per year on business. My passport was revoked after my last trip, in which I reported here that I was pulled aside in Spain after a flight from Germany (after German passport control). That could only have happened due to the notice sent ahead as they normally do not check passports after an intra-Schengen flight. It ended up not being an issue, but what if I’d had that mark in the passport?

    I’m attempting to plan my travel this fall and unsure about a scheduled Europe trip. Can anyone report back on entry/exit of Schengen WITH the mark? Did the border guard see the mark or not see it? Thanks.

    • steve

      I’m interested to know as well. I’m in the process of planning a trip to Europe next summer. I have to get a new passport as mine expired so I might luck out and get an unmarked one and be revoked when I come back.

    • Bruce

      Hey E, have you (or anyone else on this site) already got your new passport? Do you know if you use the DS-11 or DS-82 form to get the new one. I really would like to travel to see my wife at Christmas and I need to get a new passport since mine was revoked because of IML earlier in the year but I don’t want to fill out the wrong form and find out weeks later I need to do it all over again. I hope you or someone else can let me know which form to use.

      • Steve @Bruce

        I applied for a brand new one a month ago and received the passport last week without the identifier.

    • Major

      They did not look at the page 27 – just the photo page and the page they stamped.

  17. Major Henderson

    OK. A new question for anyone that possibly knows the answer.
    Why does Homeland Security always pull us out for secondary clearance? What are they looking for when they go on their computer? I finally asked one of them and was given the ridiculous answer that they were checking to see if I had changed residence during my absence. That makes no sense.
    So, are they doing it just because it is written in their procedural duties and purely for harassment or is there some actual purpose? I suppose since Angel Watch was created, they are missioned with looking for the marking on page 27, but before that was initiated – why?

    • David Kennerly's Government-Driven Life

      It’s all part of the security circus show. It pads their statistics showing that they have, in their minds, appropriately investigated someone who was already on their radar as opposed to looking for those people who aren’t but to whom they are paying little attention nonetheless. I was once the last person to clear customs from a packed jumbo jet that came from a Middle-Eastern country. So, that tells you something about their priorities as well as their ambitions. They spend countless minutes (sometimes over an hour) bent over their screens checking databases which they had already thoroughly checked the last time we went through Customs. They make phone calls to other agents in offices somewhere to find something – anything – that could make your day go much worse. They are following guidelines that have been written just for us. Aren’t we lucky?

    • NY won't let go

      Last time I entered the US they just asked me if I knew I was on the registry. Then asked how long I got put away for. And how old I was now. Then they apologized to me and said they feel sorry for me for getting stuck on the list. ( I assume they looked at my age when I was convicted, the guy doing the interview was the same age as me)

      Other than that I waited 2 hours for 3 questions. Then they let me go along my way.

      So I think they keep you there just to make sure there are no open warrants for you. I’ve herd some people getting their phones and computers completely scanned looking to see if there was any porn. Never experienced this myself.

    • Mike G

      Well, Major, David Kennerly pretty well covered it.

      Years ago, we used to go to Mexico all the time, and all you needed was a driver’s license to come back into the US. Then, they changed policies to require a passport, so I had to get one. As soon as I started showing my passport, I was sent to Secondary every time. I don’t know if any felony conviction would have triggered it, or only sex offenses, but they would take my passport into an office, type away on a computer for five or ten minutes, then bring back and hand it to me, and send us on our way.

      The big question now, is what is triggering the passport revocations. My guess is that now, when the officer sits in front of the computer screen after scanning the passport, a message pops up saying “Does this passport have the Sex Offender marking on the last page. If the officer answers no, then either another message pops up saying “confiscate the passport”, or at least a notice is sent to the state department instructing them to revoke the passport and send out the infamous “registered letter”. I got my letter about a week after I returned from Europe.

      Angel Watch was around long before the IML and marked passports became law, but they couldn’t care less about you coming back to the US, they are only concerned about warning countries when you leave the US.

      • Jason

        @Mike

        Prior to my conviction I worked in gov’t for almost 20 years, LEO. I have friends that work DHS, DOS, DOJ, and a crap load of PDs around the US. I instructed in several PDs in several countries as well. Despite my situation and not to sound boastful… I’m still networked, and I want to help you guys out. ONE TEAM, ONE FIGHT! I can ask questions if I know whats important to ask. My new father-in-law is also a recently retired immigration official in the Philippines, he can answer i-24/7 questions. Anyways, my email is rusti_eodt@yahoo.com. God bless you guys.

        • Hysteria

          Sounds like you should be using your connections to get yourself out of the mess you are in.

        • Jason

          Hysteria – matter of time my friend, it took me a few months but I finally have what I needed to prove my case was BS. Separate note… Did you ever find a job, I left you my contact info on separate comment?

      • Major Henderson

        Are you positive about your remarks on Angel Watch? I thought their creation was part of the evil Chris Smith legislation requiring the markings and notifications. Even if they were in existence prior to Smith, I never had a single problem in all my travels except for the harrassment begun when Homeland Security was assigned to target us rather than terrorists.

        • David Kennerly

          Yes, several of what would become provisions of IML were implemented, administratively, at least two years before IML came into effect. Countries were notified by the U.S. of a “sex offender’s” status and refused entry. U.S. INTERPOL even announced that these policies were about to be implemented. Later, that notice was removed, for whatever reason. We heard here, at the time, of refused entries.

  18. Mike G

    One of the problems with discussions on this thread, as well as other threads in this forum is people who say “I flew to such and such country and I never gave 21 day notice” or “I’m planning a trip to the Philippines and my local office won’t take my paperwork, so I’m going anyway, or “I spent two weeks in Florida and no one said anything” or “I’m going to Las Vegas for a week, but I’m not going to tell them”, etc.

    We often warn these people that this is risky behavior, or at least we ask them to let us know how things worked out. But if things DIDN’T work out, we are NOT going to hear anything, because they are in Jail or Prison somewhere!

    When was the last time we saw a post saying “Don’t try what I just did because I’m now sitting here in a cell”?

    • Major Henderson

      I truly think we are in deep – you know what. I have stated that I have the financial resources, IF I can find the legal representation that is talented enough and mainly MOTIVATED enough to help us with the new unconstitutional and highly discriminatory legislation that has recently been passed, masked as clarification of the Megan’s Law but in actuality new harsher and more punishing laws. Janice sent me the name of someone in Texas that could meet the requirements – supposedly. At first I was told they would call me back Monday to discuss the challenge to International Megan’s Law. Ten minutes later I was called back and told the lawyer had no interest in participating, and as the legal assistant was speaking to me, she was instructed to get off the phone with me and get back to work. Sounds scary, doesn’t it. Reminds me of the many movies I’ve seen depicting life in a Nazi or Communist country.

      • Hysteria

        I strongly feel that besides a few residency restriction fights and maybe a few individual parole restriction reductions, this is basically treading water. If it hasn’t gotten better since 1970s, and society has only gotten more unforgiving, then it will only slowly get worse. Just in the last 4 yrs, look at the terrible laws passed. Loss of expungement, IML, passport notification, no bail on sex offenses. But hey, we can live 2000 feet from a park that drug dealers and homeless hang out at.

  19. James

    @Hysteria

    I need to step in quickly to say that I am finding s certain snipping cropping up in certain conversations that seem to be saying that “Presence Restrictions,” and “”Parole Restrictions,” are nothing or…minor.

    Nothing could be further from the actual and real truth…Presence Restrictions were and are a far greater danger to us than the IML…we live in these cities, we navigate, we get around, we eat and rest here in the United States…We once could spend a little time out of the country, but our real time was spent here.

    And the Presence Restrictions were a real and pressing and everyday danger to our very existence.

    No small beans at all.

    And no one else protects us or fights for us at all except for Janice and crew…honorable and great human beings each and everyone of them.

    Cases against the IML that involved immense amounts of work have been filed and….lost. There is no dishonor in this…I thought the San Francisco case was particularly good, yet it did not succeed…however now, maybe some form of Tiered relief is on the way.

    Progress his hard…complaining is easy.

    From time to time it seems important to point this out.

    Best Wishes, James

    • Hysteria

      Agree. The restrictions set many up for failure, which in turn goes into the stat sheet as recidivism, which then gives politicians cause to create more obstacles. The laws squeeze us into navigating a mine field. Now, as one that cares more about IML, I still want to spend any time here in compliance, which gets harder every day not knowing what is going to be passed @ midnight as a rider to some abscure bill.

    • Tim Moore

      The layers of laws are immense, like the strata laid down in the Grand Canyon. It has only taken a few decades to accumulated, but might take as long to erode. Those fighting these laws are like water and are cutting a path downward, as fast as can be managed, to what we all hope is to reach the bedrock of justice. There are only two types of forces involved here, the ones who pile on, and their allies, the do nothing ones; and the eroders, the ones removing the overburden. The operant question is which side are we on. In the end it comes down to an equation. Which side of the equation are we supporting by our actions? It could make the difference.

  20. lee

    Question please. I have not received the “revoke” passport certified letter but I probably missed it not sure. Anyway, I plan on going to Europe in May 2019. My passport is set to expire 2020 but I’m worried about being stopped at the boarding gate and have my passport revoked because it has no identifier like one incident that recently happened to someone else. Could you please let me know if I can send in my current passport and renew with the identifier?

  21. georgina todd

    My husband who is on the registry gave the required 21 days notice sent certified mail. We traveled with our two kids. Just before boarding the plane, three marshals and four policemen with their guns out approached us putting me and my husband in handcuffs and issued a warning that we were under arrest. They took our kids away, took us two both to be charged. After 8 hours I was released and able to get my kids back each 8y and 10y. My husband was charged for not filing all the needed information(so they claim). He cannot get bail because the judge agreed he is a flight risk and that’s why he was trying to leave the country. We now have to find the money for a lawyer and have been told there have been a few similar cases where the registrants were found guilty and one was sentenced to seven years Federal incarceration. He also faces child trafficking. His own kids. We own our house, kids at school and we both have or had jobs. Why would leave?

    • E @ georgina

      This story seems insane. I’m so sorry

      When was this?
      What airport was this?
      What state did you come from/does he register in?
      With whom did you file the 21 day notice?
      What paperwork did you use and how much information did he put on the form?
      Where were you headed (at least the continent)?

    • steve @Georgina Todd

      We really need more info Georgina. It would be very helpful, if you are able, to answer E’s questions. Sorry that you and your kids went thru that. I hope Janice is following up with you on this.

  22. concerned

    maybe a Gundy win will wipe this out as it seems the AG is making the rules

  23. David

    U.S. Customs border searches of Cellphones and Electronics ….. Someone asked about U.S. Customs searching cellphines and other electronic devices. These two cases may be of interest: “Alasaad” and “Kolsuz”.

    https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/03/aclu-sues-tsa-over-not-providing-digital-device-search-policies/

    https://www.eff.org/press/releases/border-agents-need-warrant-search-travelers-phones-eff-tells-court

    https://www.eff.org/document/eff-border-search-pocket-guide

  24. 290 air

    Just came back from an international trip and it was the first time in at least 15 years that I wasn’t pulled into secondary. The guy even asked if we usually go to secondary and I said yes. He said he had a cousin on the registry so he knew it was harsh and for life. He said since we weren’t traveling with children he didn’t see any reason to direct us to secondary and hoped he wouldn’t get in trouble with his supervisor. Nice to see some logic and discretion still exists. Satan Watch must send a really harsh notice though to the foreign country that we travel to. When we got there they searched everything like they were told I was on my way to rape children or something. After they were done I told them sorry it wasn’t as exciting as they were anticipating and they smiled, kinda laughed, and let me go.

    • Lake County

      Eventually, everyone will have a friend or family on the registry. That will gain us more understanding of the situation and how the registry harms families.

    • E @ 290 air

      Please share where you landed? That’s huge for this conversation. Also, were the foreign border guards aware of the conviction? Do you have a marked passport?
      Thanks.

  25. 290 air

    Just came back from an international trip and it was the first time in at least 15 years since I wasn’t pulled into secondary coming back to US. Satan Watch obviously sent a really crazy notice to my destination country, but I think they realized after the search that it was some sham government agency trying to get hysterical over a 21 year old conviction.

    • Will Allen

      “Satan Watch” – that’s perfect! I will adopt that if you don’t mind. Glad things went well for you.

    • James

      Dear 290:

      I am glad that your secondary in the US went so well…but I am a little, maybe a lot, concerned that you were so thoroughly searched on your arrival in…presumably, Europe, (about the only place we can still go!)

      In any case, could you share what your destination country was?

      If possible…please.

      Best Wishes, James

  26. 290 air

    For those of you that were asking I went to Canada. I’m a dual citizen. Never been pulled into secondary or searched going to Canada until these last 2 trips where I had given my 21 day notice. Prior to them passing that last year I was never required to give a notice and never had ANY hassle. Just “welcome back” and “enjoy your trip” so obviously the 21 day notice triggered a notice sent that must have been pretty alarming for them based on their reaction. I even have a Canadian passport which I used. My US passport isn’t marked. Don’t ask why I don’t live in Canada…. long story.

    • Steve

      The only reason they let you into Canada is because you are a dual citizen. Your experience crossing the border has really no relevance to anyone here.

      • James

        Thanks, 290 air, this makes perfect sense now…dual citizenship makes all the difference, especially with Canada I would imagine.

        Canada which I miss btw, from Quebec City to Victoria BC….a good and gracious country except they won’t let me in!

        Thanks again,

        Best Wishes, James

    • TS

      @290 air

      Canada aside (and those who poo poo you getting in), which I do miss visiting our NORAD neighbors but am pleased you get to visit still, your travel experience is of value here WRT registrants traveling outside our borders and returning. It is an interesting return experience you had which can be used in the tracking of return experiences. Was it because you returned from the great white north perhaps? Have to wonder when comparing return experiences from various travel points. Thanks for letting us know.

    • Js

      Thank you for posting your experience. It is relevant to some of us. Have been wondering about this as significant other is a dual citizen and we hope to go visit family after off paper. So they just asked questions? Won’t have a canadian passport, but do have bc.

  27. 290 air

    BTW I use the words “Satan Watch” because Angel Watch implies that these guys passing laws are like angels watching over kids and we all know that is far from the description of Ron Book, Chris Smith and the rest of their cronies.

    • Will Allen

      Exactly right. They represent Satan and thus Satan is watching over and running the witch hunt that is truly harming all people. Just what Satan wants. Hate and division.

  28. Major

    Latest travel update. I traveled in September to Europe and never had anyone question me. Only a few places looked at the passport and none looked at the last page.
    Only problem was coming. back to IAH where I got one of the Homeland Security agents that felt it necessary to ask me several questions about by criminal history. I suppose they are checking to see if you will lie. Really? Who doesn’t realize that they have your complete history in-front of them on the computer screen?
    The whole thing is just silly.

    • David Kennerly's Government-Driven Life

      My response to those questions about my criminal history was always to tell them “I guess you already have that information in front of you (their computer screen). Yes, you always have to be cautious to never say anything factually incorrect as they will charge you with lying to the police.

    • David

      I certainly agree, Major. Once when I was going through secondary, the CBP “mall cop” asked me if I had ever been arrested. Like what am I going to say, “No officer, I have no idea why you’re pulling me aside for special attention (a/k/a harassment)!”

    • E @ Major

      Major, you have a marked passport and we’re traveling in Europe/Schengen countries? Thanks for the update. The first first-hand report we have if you have a marked passport.

      • Major

        I bought a new computer and just got around to reading the comments on my post about traveling to Europe.
        1. Yes, I have the marked passport. As I previously stated, no-one ever looked at page 27.
        2. I flew into Amsterdam and then to Prague. Prague did not check passports.
        3. The cruise line checked our passports multiple times, but never looked at page 27.
        4. No country to which I traveled looked at the passports.
        5. I asked to receive assistance (wheelchair) when arriving back in Houston. They rolled me directly to a passport agent and he immediately told the person assisting me that “He needs to go to secondary.” There the Homeland Security agent did the usual search on his computer and called me up and asked, “Have you ever been arrested?,” then “What were the charges?” and last “How long did you serve?” He nodded his head as I answered the questions to indicate that I had answered truthfully. Then he said I could go.
        6. After you return from an international trip, you have to return the letter authorizing your trip to the police department. My registration officer asked how everything went and I told her the only problem was when going through Homeland Security. She commented that I could have said to the officer asking the questions that they already knew the answer to the questions because they had it on their computer screen. I didn’t say anything to her, but I feel that making any waves could result in them holding you longer before admitting you into the US.

        • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

          She’s right: they do already know it. Tell them just that as I have done when asked the same questions in secondary in the past. Try not to play their games. Try not to give them too much satisfaction. Let them know that you resent their treatment of you as a second-class citizen.

        • AJ

          @Major:
          “6. After you return from an international trip, you have to return the letter authorizing your trip to the police department.”
          —–
          Could you explain this please? Are you on paper? If not, who is telling you you need authorization to travel?

  29. Mike G

    @Major

    Yes, thank you for the update. If you have a chance, you might mention which airport you flew into and what countries you visited. We have trips scheduled in 2019 flying into Athens and Naples.

    I’m wondering is this category should be updated to “International Travel with the Marked Passport”. Just a thought.

  30. NY won't let go

    I just got back from my trip and got back to my home country. No issues besides getting caught at customs with extra smokes. Got foreigner taxed but that’s it.

    Heard an announcement at the airport though saying for all people traveling to the US there would be a heavy interview prior to going to immigration and security check due to heighten security in the US. Not sure who are the people interviewing are but pretty sure it’s people from the US.

    • David

      I believe the interviews will be conducted by the President himself who is looking for his next Eastern European Mrs. Trump!

      • NY won't let go

        That would be a trip if he was doing the interviews I would ask for a presidentential pardon, could introduce him to his next hundred or so wives if he wanted.

      • Robert

        Why do you have to make such a stupid dumb comment? This isn’t about Trump. It’s about us. Get it? Besides Trump wasn’t the one who put you on the registry. You did

  31. E

    Interesting post at FAC about denied entry to Kenya. Good example that the final decision always rests with the border guard.

    https://floridaactioncommittee.org/member-submission-denied-entry-into-kenya/

  32. steve

    Not sure if this has ever been posted but:

    From Interpol website.
    Article 89: Green notices
    (1) Green notices are published to warn about a person’s criminal activities.
    (2) GREEN NOTICES MAY ONLY BE PUBLISHED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
    (a) The person is considered to be a possible threat to public safety;

    In Doe-VS Conn One of the reasons they found the SOR websites constitutional was because in the opinion written by Rehnquist he states “The Court reasoned that, because the law was not based on an offender’s dangerousness, but rather only on convictions, disclosing an offender on the registry without a hearing did not violate due process.” Interpol clearly states above YOU NEED TO BE A THREAT to issue a green notice therefore our government is making that assessment about our dangerousness contradicting Rehnquist.

    (b) This conclusion has been drawn from an assessment by a national law-enforcement authority or an international entity;

    In the 6th’s ruling this would be ex-post facto.

    (c) This assessment is based on the person’s previous criminal conviction(s) or other reasonable grounds;
    (d) Sufficient data concerning the threat are provided for the warning to be relevant.

    • CR

      @Steve — “In the 6th’s ruling this would be ex-post facto.”

      What are you saying would be ex post facto? Why?

      • steve @CR

        In the Michigan case the 6th circuit said it’s unconstitutional to go back a give someone a tiering designation or changing their tiering without due process. I would think with the government saying we are a threat is somewhat similar as we were not given due process. That’s why I go back to Connecticut vs Doe. They said the online registry is not telling society who’s dangerous. But IMLIS because Interpol won’t accept a green notice if someone is not a threat. Someone posted on the Florida Action board a person can appeal a green notice with Interpol I need to do more research on that. I only found something on red notices being appealed.

        • James

          Yes, Steve, I saw that also…but I don’t know how one would go about challenging INTERPOL in reference to being willing to not forward a US Green Notice…(after all their own President, the President of INTERPOL himself was just kidnapped back to China! {true story}).

          But this is something that bears watching and research for sure.

          Best Wishes, James

        • David Kennerly, Travelling Boogeyman

          Regarding Green Notices: keep in mind that INTERPOL, as an international organization, is not making the decision to issue Green Notices in our regard, it is the U.S. Department of Justice which operates its own staff of “U.S. INTERPOL.” Each INTERPOL member nation gets to decide whose criminal background, among their citizens, will be disseminated through the use of notices. However, INTERPOL can veto their issuance (at least with Red Notices) when individual nations attempt to use notices for political repression or to silence their critics. Inclusion of such notices when the subject is considered to be a political dissident has become a major controversy in recent years and INTERPOL has had to withdraw some of these notices. Even so, INTERPOL, as an international organization, has no authority to decide which U.S. Citizen will be the subject of any notice, including Green Notices. Their bylaws explicitly acknowledge individual countries’ sole authority to submit such records to its database. INTERPOL is at pains to represent itself not as an international police agency but as an international clearinghouse for criminal data in cooperation with law enforcement of their member countries. This hasn’t stopped some of those law enforcement agencies from wearing INTERPOL uniforms, however when conducting law enforcement actions, sometimes in multinational task forces.

        • David Kennerly, Travelling Boogeyman

          I should add that INTERPOL does have investigative staff and conducts investigations which are then shared with the relevant governments. They don’t have the power of arrest (yet).

        • James

          Thanks Mr. Kennerly, you always add real value and clarity to any issue you turn mind to.

          However, the dream is nice that maybe there was another avenue to attack these damned Green Notices….more court cases I suppose.

          I am sorry that I do not know more.

          Best Wishes, James

  33. bill

    i assume nothing is going to happen to get 311.11 convictions put into tier one until the new law goes into place. Just checking

  34. TR

    @David Kennerly, Travelling Boogeyman
    Correct me if I’m wrong, so when a registrant does the notification for international travel, with the US Marshals informed, is the U.S. Interpol and not the international Interpol the one sending out the notices? Another words do you believe our government is acting unilaterally with the angel watch operation?

    • steve @David K

      My point was not that Interpol issues the Green Notices, we all know the US sends it to Interpol. My point was that there are Interpol standards for accepting them. The US is making a determination that we are dangerous or a threat, (something the Supreme Court said the government ISN’T doing on Megan’s Law websites Conn vs Doe..IML contradiction) the US has to or Interpol won’t accept the green notice.

      • David (not K)

        So Steve, using that Conn v. Doe SCOTUS ruling as a basis, couldn’t a “Registrant
        John Doe” sue Angel Watch for sending Green Notices without first determining on an individual basis that Registrant John Doe is, in fact, currently considered “dangerous”?

        • steve @ David (Not K)

          I have emailed Interpol and got a response. They want me to send a letter and verify who I am by sending a copy of my passport. Your question to me is also my question.

        • Scotus Save Us Now

          I am curious what they reply with…

        • David (not K)

          @ Steve, Could you post that Interpol mailing address? I would like very much to ask for copies of whatever they are sending to countries about me.

        • James

          Dear Steve;

          Thank you! That’s really great of you to take the Initiative in this fashion.

          I am impressed and…thankful.

          Let us know the results, please.

          Best Wishes, James

      • David Kennerly, Travelling Boogeyman

        Steve, that’s a good question, i.e. “because Interpol won’t accept a green notice if someone is not a threat” and the question of a finding of “dangerousness.” AJ would be a good one to weigh-in on the applicability of recent court rulings to this issue. INTERPOL, itself, may not be all that fastidious about the need for dangerousness. From what I know of them (and especially about Mick Moran who’s in charge of the “crimes against children” division) I would say that we should not expect them to be any better than our own government. They are pretty scary in their own right.

      • AJ

        @steve:
        Are you in contact with the Interpol mothership in Lyon, France, or the DOJ one in DC? I suggest you contact both. If you do, I think it would be wise to get the info from the French office first, as you don’t want to show your hand to the US Bureaucrats. In fact, it might be a good idea to ping France, then FOIA DOJ, then ping France again after getting your FOIA docs to see what, if anything, has changed once you contacted DOJ. (Gotta try to catch them in their deception if you can!)

        • steve @ (AJ)

          The address they want me to send my letter is in Lyon France.

        • steve @ (AJ)

          Thank you for the advice. Yes, my plan was to inquire with Interpol first regarding their own standards for issuing the green notices.

          “I think it would be wise to get the info from the French office first, as you don’t want to show your hand to the US Bureaucrats. In fact, it might be a good idea to ping France, then FOIA DOJ, then ping France again after getting your FOIA docs to see what, if anything, has changed once you contacted DOJ. (Gotta try to catch them in their deception if you can!)”

  35. Fortunate Traveler

    This only applies to Mexico. It has been difficult to find attorneys in Mexico that will provide representation in Mexico. They want to hide and not take the case. I have found a firm which includes and American attorney and a Mexican national. They helped me and now all I have to do is present my passport and any other supporting documents at the border immigration station. This has taken a long time but not all that expensive. I also had some good luck. If you are interested, contact me at latintravel@registranttag.org.
    I will give you the contact info. Any case is tough, but this firm will at least advocate on your behalf.

    • Concerned Registrant

      Fortunate Traveler: Glad to hear things are working out for you. It would be helpful to give a little more information. Are you and Mexican national, or of Mexican nationality? Are you married to a Mexican national? What was the argument that allowed your attorneys to succeed for you?

    • PK

      Mike, have you tried to do that and has it worked?

  36. steve @ (David not K)

    Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files
    200, quai Charles de Gaulle
    69006 Lyon
    France

  37. E

    @steve–nice work. Thanks for keeping us updated.

    My concern would be Angel Watch going much broader than “just” the green notices. Don’t they talk/email directly with each country we list on our itinerary? Or is it somewhere published (SMART or somewhere??) that green notices is how this happens? I would assume we need to attack SMART’s authority to send anything to anyone… which of course was permitted (after they started doing it) within IML.

    Are you researching this apart from the scarlet marking? Do you have the passport marker?

    • steve @ (E)

      No I don’t have the marker..yet.Traveling to Europe next summer. I am only attempting to question their own standards for issuing the notices.

      • dontgetit

        One should not lose sight of the fact that this identifier is added strictly and directly to protect children from unspeakable horrors committed by this group of travelers.

        As such, any passport held by every single one of these 900k+ individuals should be revoked immediately. Is this a great logistical or costly effort? Not really – they have all mailing addresses of those affected, the cost of a new (and marked) document is borne by the applicant (regardless of length of validity of the current document).

        So why is this not being done post-haste? It is the law, and if it saves one child… seriously – why not?

        Then you would think that any application for a new or replacement passport would for sure trigger the marking. Surprisingly it does not appear to.

        What does appear to trigger the revocation is a completed trip with an unmarked passport. Round trip. And since we all “know” that the only reason a registrant travels overseas is to sexually abuse children in the most horrific ways (justifying the mark), is the government not complicit in aiding and abetting such crimes certain to take place during a registrant’s travels?

        How creepy is that?

        • TS

          Only problem with your premise is not every one of the 900K needs a mark to save one child who they travel overseas to see in person. It is less than that.

          So, why isn’t the gov’t then processing the known knowns of these who should have the mark since it would seem to be so easy to do so? Because 1) not every one of them has a passport and the USG won’t give them one if they don’t have a need for one; 2) who is willing to extend passport processing times for those who don’t need a mark for a bunch of people who need something marked in theirs?; and 3) who is going to pay for the plus up of people, technology, etc required to meet the passport need of those who have to have mark? Certainly not the USG because that is a cost they cannot pay when the elected officials are asked why is it taking so long to get an expedited unmarked passport returned for spring break in a foreign land.

          As you said, the round trip is the big triggering factor for most travelers, not all, as we know here. So, any proactive marked passport work ahead of time may be moot and merely to cause more angst when one wants to be traveling. This would be in line with the cost the registry gives out because it is just a side effect with no ramifications on the person, e.g price club membership, etc.

        • Chester M

          The IML law states that the State Department has to get a determination from the Angle Watch Center for each registrant. So I would imagine that the Angle Watch Center is not prepared to do all the paperwork involved in making that determination for all potential registrants with passports.

    • AJ

      @E:
      “Don’t they talk/email directly with each country we list on our itinerary?”
      —–
      Yes almost assuredly. Uncle Sam outright admits it uses its foreign-posted FBI and USMS people (and probably DHS and other ilk) to liaise with their in-country counterparts. So it’s above and beyond Green Notices. (I don’t have the GAO or SMART doc at hand that mentioned they do this, but I have read it a couple times.)

      One would need to FOIA FBI and USMS to find out what’s been said and sent, but it will probably come back redacted except for your name..if you get anything, given they could throw the LE trump card on it all.

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • 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.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • 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.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues 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.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please answer this question to prove that you are not a robot *