ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings 2019 [details]
Emotional Support Group: (Los Angeles) 12/22 [details]

Registration Laws for all 50 States

General News

Putting Trump’s Travel Ban and IML into Perspective

It’s been just over one week since Trump’s Travel Ban targeted certain immigrants and global citizens.  For those who followed this act day by day, it was very tumultuous week.  During the first few days, foreign green card holders and visa holders were instantly deported back to the country where their flight came from.  Some were detained for questioning by DHS and released.  The US government revoked between 60,000 and 100,000 visas that it previously approved for travel.   Civil rights and immigration attorneys quickly filed lawsuits.  One week later, federal courts intervened and suspended the travel ban, allowing the approved visa holders to once again commence their journey to the United States. Full Article

Join the discussion

  1. Nicholas Maietta

    I was wondering when someone was going to write an article covering this subject. I have been thinking about this since i heard the “ban”.

    The difference is that there is no registry for muslims under the new new administration, while the is for sex offenders (yet. keep reading for that.) Muslims are being treated like criminals because of the actions of a few by comparison to its whole population. But what’s interesting is that Trump has made it clear he wants a muslim registry. At the time, i heard no lines drawn in any articles making that comparison to the sex offender registry.

    Here is an article from one of the very few non-fake news websites: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/17/the-evolution-of-donald-trump-and-the-muslim-database/

    There are way more parallels between sex offender and muslims than people seem to understand. The difference now is how this even will play out for muslims and what that means ultimately for registered citizens. Let not the muslim ban issue harming muslims be in vain– a silver lining may be that it may help restore the rights of registered citizens to freely travel. We’ll see how the courts try to dance around the parallels and how they’ll argue how different these are. One is criminal and one is not. The criminality has only to do with the past for registered citizens while it is absolutely not a crime to be a muslim, but that is as far as their arguments should go if they want to pull that argument out for their reason to continue punishing registered citizens for something they are convicted for in the past, which has nothing to do with travel, mind you.

    I find it ironic that our country doesn’t want us around, yet they don’t want us to leave.

    • DavidH

      yeah there might be some saving grace in those taking the Muslim argument forward–they’re not the hated of the worst. The unique parallel I find is manufactured FEAR! take fear away they’re left with no argument!

  2. Civil rights first

    Very well stated. But we RSO’s are worst than terrorist…. Aren’t we?
    I had travelled to Thailand twice to visit with my fiance but in the third time I want stopped at immigration in Thailand and effectivity blacklisted from ever entering Thailand. Due to this my fiance ended our relationship… I’ve been off probation for 4 years and my offense happened 20 years ago, I did 10 years of probation without violation… No history of kidnapping or trafficking of any kind… Where is the empirical evidence that says registered citizens have this propensity? I don’t hold much hope it will ever change. The judge stated: “The Executive Order adversely affects the states’ residents in the areas of employment, education, business, family relations and freedom to travel.” I would be willing if you asked the same judge what he thought of IML and it’s affects on registered citizens like mine and the many others he would not rule the same. When I completed all my requirements I got a paper from the state of Washington reinstating my civil rights…. Ya bullshit!!!

    • Nicholas Maietta

      I attended the court hearing in Oakland last year and seem to remember it being brought up that anyone visiting Thailand is there for only 1 purpose, which is child sex tourism. Everyone in the courtroom was looking at eachother in disbelief trying to figure out if that was actually what they heard was said. It’s true. It really was said.

      Our government is a big machine. It gets some things right and it gets a lot of things wrong. But it is inundated with a cancer called politicians. I believe in a government without politicians but that is far to utopian for most to believe possible.

      Registry for all, or registry for none.

      • Civil rights first

        So they said anyone… Even non registered citizens…. The ignorance of some people… Why wasn’t I ever offered a chance to explain the reason of my attended travel? They obviously knew I was traveling to a foreign country…. Why wasn’t I ever contacted for a hearing? I could of shown proof of reason even my fiance would of said I was coming to visit her…. Oh that’s right I had my hearing…. 20 years ago and now I’m tired by legislation….. But wait isn’t there something in the Constitution that prohibits trial by legislation… Ya no bill of Attainder… But IML says that since I’m a registered citizen that means I’m traveling to engage in child sex trafficking….
        But if they said anyone that travels to Thailand is engaging in that bullshit shouldn’t they just ban everyone from going there…. Such bullshit..

      • Don't forget the beaches

        They forget Thailand has some of the prettiest beaches in the world (albeit overcrowded now) and the US Navy pulls in there while in the area. Ignorance is bliss…

  3. Joe123

    Janice,

    There was a great comment posted by a commentator that shows clearly in Black and White that any judge could understand that IML is completely unnecessary:

    Page 19 of the 2010 GAO study referenced in the article: http://www.gao.gov/assets/310/305432.pdf

    “The [State] Department does have legal authority to deny passports in certain circumstances, including limited authority to deny in cases involving sex offenders. As noted in the draft report, Congress has already provided the Department authority to deny passports to individuals convicted of the crime of sex tourism involving minors and who used their passport or passport card or otherwise crossed an international border in committing an offense. The Department is currently working with the Department of Justice (DOJ) to implement this legislation. The Department also has authority to deny passports to individuals for whom an order of probation or parole as been entered by a court forbidding departure from the United States. When such orders are entered for sex offenders, the Department has authority to deny their passports on that basis.”

    • USG redundancy of course

      But Joe123, GAO reports with info like that don’t get votes for anyone when votes are needed to get elected/re-elected, e.g. Rep Chris Smith, D-NJ.

      It is also the USG where redundancy is a must for every regulation, which is what the current administration has said there is too much of. You must rid yourselves of two regulations for everyone one proposed. I wonder if that applies to those that were passed by Congress and made into laws? Can they chose to not enforce the law since the ability was already on the books?

      Good find on that GAO info! I hope Janice will use it!

  4. J

    Your God Obama signed IML. Even after all our Lobbying and Letters..

  5. DavidH

    This article states the trust of the issue. It’s beyond me how we ended up in a situation where it’s deemed we have no standing!

  6. Steve

    I requested an FOIA tonight with ICE (Angel Watch)regarding the letters they are sending out to foreign countries. Has anybody tried this?

  7. USA

    Great comments! So, if I’m not mistaken, the new passport law will only affect those with child related offenses? Also, are those being stopped/or denied entry into places like Thailand/Mexico/Canada & the Philippines been convicted of child related offenses or ? Just curious

  8. USA

    I think it would be interesting to know if they are only stopping (Mexico/Canada) child related offenders or all? Has anyone with an expunged record tried? Just curious

  9. American Detained in America

    How about a little perspective. Don’t buy in to what the media says about the “travel ban,” as it isn’t really a travel ban, but a suspension of travel from only seven countries, countries in which more terrorists come from than all the rest of the world combined, so they can put a better method of vetting out any possible terrorists who might try to infiltrate the US posed as refugees in place. And it’s only a four month suspension(Obama once did a six month suspension and I never heard anyone call it unjustified or hateful or cruel), and doesn’t affect those who already have been granted permanent residency here, not a permanent ban. Yes, this affects thousands if not tens of thousands, but if they have no nefarious reasons for coming here, they should still be able to come after the suspension is lifted. It is not cruel, as this article claims, it is simply a protective measure to keep the people on US soil safe.

    However, registered citizens here DO have a permanent ban from many countries, and this band affects not just thousands or even tens of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands, but millions and millions of us and our families. And it’s not just the IML that has done this. Dozens of countries, due to influence from the US, have created laws which prohibit us as registered citizens from traveling there.

    There is no huge outcry that the UK has created a hateful law that keeps millions of us from possibly traveling there for vacation or business. And don’t expect a huge outcry from either liberals or conservatives that having “identifiers” on passports makes us targets or even that it has put us in league with Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union as the only governments to ever create a subclass of citizens to be identified as such. Don’t mourn that a Hillary presidency would have helped get a more liberal justice appointment to SCOTUS because both sides use us as political tools. If you don’t believe me, just look at the history of the new senator from California, Kamala Harris, a democrat with a long history of persecuting registered citizens, or that the IML was passed and signed into law by the most liberal president this country has ever had. We needn’t hold our breath, it’s going to be a very long, very difficult battle to get this overturned if we can at all.

  10. steve

    Travel ban a violation of DUE PROCESS! -9th Circuit

  11. concerned registrant

    The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals just decided that the previous decision against the TrumptImmigration Executive Order should be upheld on the basis that it denied “due process” to visa holders — non-citizens and non-residents. Yet, IML refuses to allow my foreign wife to enter the United States, and she has no means of receiving due process, and anyone who has challenged this bad law has been refused. Shouldn’t this decision be used to our favor?

  12. abolishtheregistry.com

    I read the executive order and then followed the codes referenced and also went to read the INA. Damn sure looks like to me he has every legal right to revoke them as long as he followed the listed procedure. If he did not then the businesses and the states have a legitimate case.

  13. Timmr

    In my humble opinion, we need to stand with those who stand against reactionary fear based governing. That sort governing is why we are where we are, because of the fear based sex offender laws. Whenever the government states that it needs to disrupt people’s lives and states it is a because of an emergency they say is based on secret facts, lets us say pause, and let us really look at what is going on.
    Kudos to Robarts and the ninth circuit. They are the ones who put a halt to that other “emergency”, the internet identifiers.

  14. Political Prisoner

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A Virginia federal judge offered a blistering critique of the Trump administration’s travel ban on Friday, citing a “startling” lack of evidence that travelers from the seven Muslim-majority countries represented a specific national security threat.
    And where is the evidence that RSO are travelling oversea to commit sex crimes?

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/virginia-judge-blasts-trump-travel-ban/ar-AAmOrYM?li=AA5a8k&ocid=spartandhp

  15. PK

    Here is a breaking news story about the woman who was deported to Mexico:

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/10/us/mexico-government-warning/index.html

    The Reporter explained that despite having a “relatively minor” felony conviction, this poor illegal immigrant was deported back to Mexico. She didn’t even have time to gather all of her belongings.

    How about those poor RSO’s who don’t even have a felony conviction,,, hundreds and hundreds get immediately deported from foreign countries back to the US- all of the time apparently, according to Representative Chris.

    Even, I read of an RSO who was deported from Mexico back to the US, and wasn’t even able to return back to Mexico to pick-up his belongings.

    Where is the breaking news story about that?

    • Robert

      PK, In addition to IML, many of the same families have been subjected to USCIS’s AWA policy (not law).
      Contrast this story with AWA families: When an AWA petition gets denied, the foreign spouse (called beneficiary by UICIS) with no criminal record gets deported.
      In other words, the AWA alien spouse is deported because of the conviction of another person. Unlike the mother of two in the story who was deported for her own felony conviction.

      explained here: https://fightawa.org/adam-walsh-child-protection-and-safety-act-of-2006

Leave a Reply to Don't forget the beaches Cancel 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 *