ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (07/23 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

ACSOL Conference Oct 1, 2022 



IML Lawsuit Filed

A lawsuit was filed today in the Central District of the U.S. District Court of California challenging regulations issued by the State Department that announced the addition of a “unique identifier” to the passports of some registrants. Addition of the identifier to passports could affect more than 500,000 Americans and their families.

“The State Department violated the requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) when it failed to provide the public with an opportunity to comment upon its regulations,” stated ACSOL Executive Director and attorney Janice Bellucci. “As a result of the State Department’s significant violations, we are asking the Court to order the agency to begin again its regulatory process.”

According to the lawsuit, the State Department issued the regulations in September 2016 and October 2017. The agency declared the first regulation to be a “final rule” and did not request public comment before taking effect. The agency issued the second regulation in the form of a press release which was later posted on the agency’s website.

In its regulations, the State Department also declared that it will not issue passport cards to some registrants. According to the lawsuit, Congress did not provide the State Department with this authority, but instead required the State Department to add a unique identifier to passport cards issued to some registrants.

The plaintiffs in the case include the Alliance for Constitutional Sex Offense Laws, a national non-profit organization, as well as two registrants who reside in the Central District. One of the registrants has an existing passport without an identifier and is concerned that his passport could be revoked while he is traveling overseas. The second registrant does not yet have a passport and is afraid to apply for one because it would include a unique identifier.

“The possibility of having a unique identifier added to their passports has had a dramatic chilling effect upon hundreds of thousands of American citizens,” stated Bellucci. “Due to this concern, they are choosing either not to travel overseas or not to apply for a passport.”

The United States, in the past, has not added a unique identifier to the passport of any American citizen. The only countries known to have done this in the past are Germany and Russia.



Call-in meeting regarding International Megan’s Law (IML) on Jan 30

Related Media (AP)

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

Somebody should have the guts to confront Chris Smith about his bill, and put him in his place.

We got this!!!! Thanks J.

Best of luck with this Janice. Although I have no money for travel, I resent that I would be unable to freely travel if I wanted to like any other free citizen.

Not sure I understand. So we are just asking them to start again so they can pretend to listen to the public so they can go ahead and put the identifiers on?

W O W , It’s Happening! Now the biggest lawsuit (Fed) that ACSOL has ever undertaken!
Hope they keep those blindfolds on once they review ALL in your suit {Fed Courts) for fairness and completeness of their OWN LAW passed not following the Constitution and other points your Team has
brought against them to prove how unfair the Pres. {Obama} had on when he signed, not knowing the consequences it brings to the one’s that suffer including families and ones crimes decades old and have NEVER even traveled before besides denying one to see a ill or life threatened or even funeral for that matter back to country of origin or where they might of grown up or their family moved to.
Just Wrong on so many levels
let’s get out some donations, including me as unemployed, this is BIG.

Thank you, Janice, you’re now Saint Janice!

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge John F. Walter and Magistrate Judge Paul L. Abrams.

John Walter:

Paul Abrams:

The district judge is a Bush appointee, while the magistrate is an Obama appointee (and former public defender). Good luck to Janice et al! I think I speak for everyone else in saying that we are rooting hard for this victory!!

Are registrants allowed to travel to Mexico?

This has huge implications for me and my family. I travel internationally for business and my fiance’ is a foriegner. Thanks Janice. Good luck.

May God Bless this challenge and bring us all justice!

Actually, there is another politician in New Jersey. If you dig into the Congressional Record you will find that there was one and only one mind you who spoke out against the reauthorization of the Adam Walsh act. His name is Senator Cory Booker, Democrat, New Jersey. Also, he and Senator Kamala Harris are the the first African Americans to be appointed to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which just happened this week !

Time to DONATE!!!

I got a question if you decide not to get the new passport with the unique identifier that identifies you as a registrant whose crime involves a minor and you just don’t travel at all what happens then, is that a crime?

Our government is doing some real sick things, and they are no less evil.

I lost everything in a fire a few weeks ago just after getting my life back on track. I would love to help in some way, but I cannot. So instead, i say thank you and will be watching from a distance. Thank you to everyone who can help as well.

Got in trouble in 98 with statutory rape and Chris Smith aka Dennis Hassert wants to mark my passport in 2018, 20 years after?????(NOTTTT). These judges see the bs…….. KICK HIS MOLE ASS J. THANKS.

Also, don’t forget to read this article “Some Americans may need a passport to fly domestically in 2018”

Currently, states like New York, California, and New Jersey are having their extension requests reviewed. If they are not granted by January 22, residents will need a passport to travel on domestic flights.

From Florida. Best of luck Janice and ACSOL. Hope we get this win.

Glad to see it made the major wire services! The story could use some meat to it, but it’s still good to get it out there.

This can only be good, as it will cast light on the topic. There will certainly be the chorus of cretins who say, “They should be thankful they’re allowed to travel…or even live,” but there will probably be a good number of pieces written in support of our side.

The members and friends of Citizens for Criminal Justice Reform thanks you for continuing this fight. Best wishes and prayers for success!

Thank you Janice for all you are doing for ALL of us. I am not understanding why you are taking this angle with regards to ‘public comment’ – as others have mentioned, the public in general would be happy if we were all locked up on an island and still considered all of us monsters. So even if this is a ‘win’ it is putting off the inevitable – may delay it, but might make it worse if it comes to the public commenting.

In regards to not everyone having the stupid stamp, I thought this was originally based on ‘conviction’ not the registry? If it is based on the registry and if you are no longer on it, then would this apply? Furthermore, there are hundreds of possible offenses, how do you know (tried to find, but couldn’t even on the State’s site) what all those are?

Based on the 10th Circuit ruling on driver’s licenses, how can that be overcome, that was a HUGE blow to this fight. I know it was only one courts ruling, but major impact all over, but I guess I have to believe that other courts District/Circuit would see things differently – hopefully!

In this letter, someone said they are ‘afraid to travel’ which is the GOAL of the pathetic politicians of creating this whole thing – they are winning as long as that is the case. That being said, this stamp, IF it is on the very last page, that no one ever looks at and sometimes can even get stuck together, most will never see it. (has anyone seen a passport they can post a picture of?) There are ways to travel internationally even with all of this hell they are putting us thru, many countries in EU (east and west) could care less and don’t agree with this policy. Mexico, it kind of sucks, but not really, there are plenty of other great beaches – such as the US virgin islands/Puerto Rico/Guam where you don’t NEED a passport to go there! Canada, they won’t let anyone in with ANY felony – don’t even try to fly thru Canada!! This all SUCKS bad, but don’t let them win – there are still options, many of them.

Let’s hope this and many other lawsuits to come will hopefully succeed – we can bitch and moan and hide, OR can stand up and join Janice, Alison and all the other amazing attorneys (and their teams), help when we can, donate, etc.

Moderator –

It may help the discussion here to have the Pub Law link posted above on the law signed by Pres. Obama to avoid misinformation from happening, which appears on who gets a unique identifier and not and notification:

I know it is posted on other postings here previously, but maybe a reference link here could help (certainly would not hurt). Just a helpful thought.

BTW, thanks for all your hard work on keeping the flow going on these many postings by the masses. It cannot be easy at times.

“The State Department previously said the notice will not prevent sex offenders from traveling outside the United States nor affect the validity of their passports. However, other countries may prohibit or place strict restrictions on the travel of convicted felons.”

Here they go again- mis-stating the facts. Not ALL RSO’s are convicted Felons. Some poor a****** with Misdemeanors too got swept up in all of this Registry mess.

Man, I am really surprised I am not getting media coverage on my suit. I guess they feel it’s a joke or impossible to win Pro Se or someone tipped the press off on Janice’s suit, but we’ll see what happens. This suit is all tech errors and has no real bite except to postpone the inevitable, but A+ for jumping in at any level…..

Dear Janice,
The English language has no words that can accurately express the depths of this registrant’s gratitude for all your amazing sacrifices and incredible hard work to help us. Therefore, I will let that sentence speak for itself and add a simple “Thank you!” as the tiny cherry to top that infinitely large sundae.

Why don’t they also include info to the country about nature of offense, disposition, and date of offense. They are throwing a vague , general blanket out there knowing that says ” this person did SOMETHING, but we won’t tell you what”. The idea has SOME merit regarding violent offenders.But , as usual , they want to appear like this would stop ALL sex crimes forever.

Just saw this @NARSOL via HuffPo

On the registry? Your passport is now invalid

Applicable to those with convictions involving a minor

I’m sorry to say that I don’t think this suit can be won unless the challenge is that just RSO crimes are listed and all others are not. The Government is listing a true fact and that’s all the courts will look at.

I’d be happy to go to the protest against IML and supporting the case, like the last one. Lawsuits I believe are not enough. Learning from gay and other movements , you have to show faces.

I flew to Cancun Mexico with a misdemeanor 311.11(a) in September 2015. As soon as the plane met the gate the flight attendant announced my name and advised that I needed to exit the plane first. I was with my girlfriend at the time who was aware of my status but did not expect this to happen. I was of course denied entry and we were both put on an immediate flight back to the States.

My passport expired in 2017 and I’m now hesitant to apply for a new one. I would really like to be able to travel abroad again and know that I can for sure visit certain countries prior to arriving there.

If I could remain publicly unnamed I would be willing to testify in court to the embarrassment and humiliation I suffered that day and how my girlfriend sat and cried on the way home totally frustrated.

To focus on only the unique identifier, and preemptively decide that sending the alert on some registrants and the sex offense record on all, even misdemeanants and even for offenses for which the feds do not require registration but the state does, is to pull the wool over registrants’ eyes and undermine their best ingtests. Taht alwert, and even that sex offense record being sent, will get resgirtatns nixed from entering most countries – it already does — and they won’t find out until they get there.

This approach is already compromising the best interests of registrants, and shows that this group supports registration and this sending of the record as Constitutional. But it doesn’t even matter if its Constitutional, tiis wrong and 110% unacceptable anyway.

If this group is not going to fight for real relief for registrants, only touch here and there around the edges, then it is a bankrupt group giving false hope — just the same as the drastically overdone cheerleading for the fake tiers, which are just renamed CORs but with longer time frames for some offenses — yes, this group pushed for some registrants to have to register for a longer period in trade for calling a COR a tier.

This is the kind of BS approach the ACLU has been taking for the past couple of decades on any number of topics (even as is spent that time refusing to do anything for registrants). It is a complete failure that this group could not get into the discussions on the tiers, but the ACLU did, and did what ti always does now, BS comprised garbage that does little to change the status quo! And this group let itself be co-opted by the ACLU’s lead.

This is going to sound weird and may not be worth to something, but when I was at the airport immigration area in Lima, Peru back on June 8/9, 2016, I saw with my own eyes a letter on the desk that was in Spanish which was about me coming into the country while I was waiting to be sent back to the US.

This all sucks, we know that, simple question – what can we do to help? Complaining doesn’t change anything, is there ANYTHING we can do to help with this huge challenge?

Also support the lawsuit against the IML.

We all should donate. That’s what I’m doing even though it’s not a lot per month. But each dollar counts as more and more people donate. There are court costs and other costs to file and maintain a lawsuit, so let’s cobtribute everyone!

I read this article on the RTAG website but the article came from injustice today what do you all think of this?

I wonder with most countries around the world that are turning registrant travelers away under the IML, and some countries that are not turning them away in spite of travel notices being sent out by the Angel watch, if there are countries that are waking up to the craziness of the IML? and would it be a good idea to get international support that is against the IML and can they be useful for the battle against the IML even for a lawsuit?

correct me if I’m wrong but when the IML was passed not only did Chris Smith got the highest levels of our government to support it but also got international involvement too, even though his rhetorical statements were based on logical fallacies.

That may be, because countries also have made agreements with others to not accept that country’s political prisoners. The United Nations frowned on that, but wonder if they are using this meme “if it saves one child” to put blinders on this facial conflict with articles 06, 07, 11, 12 and 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
I don’t know what they can do about it, anyway. The US would just threaten to cut off aid to UN programs.

Are there some foreign countries that are aware of the IML that’s imposed by our government, and are they all in support?

@DavidKennerly you’re going to have to renew sometime, so you may as well do it now.

What’s going on here please? I thought they had until the 10th to respond. Did they? And so now what?

Perhaps if anyone on here has PACER access, they can look up the lawsuit and see what update(s) have occurred, if any, especially with respect to the response due on the 10th.

Also, given the couple of recent reports in the other thread about revoked passports, if those folks reside in the relevant district, should the suit be amended to add plaintiff(s), if those folks are willing? Just a thought.

Very well written lawsuit, excellent job Janice!

Is there any news about this IML lawsuit? ⏳

Does anybody have any updates on the IML lawsuit?

Is there any update to this? Has the government responded? It’s been over 2 months since filed and curious about the status as I’ m sure this has a direct impact on ability and willingness to travel abroad for many people, especially since some passports have been revoked.

Maybe they dismissed the lawsuit already and are coming up with some lame reason to do it.

Per PACER, Scheduling Conference to occur on June 18 in Los Angeles. Joint Report due June 4. Below is what’s due on June 4 and I leave it to more legal minds to decipher and translate to lay terms.

“Counsel are directed to comply with Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 26-1 in a timely fashion and to file a Joint Report, on or before June 4, 2018. The title page of theJoint Report must state the date and time of the Scheduling Conference.
The parties must include the following information in their Joint Report which, except in unusually complex cases, should not exceed ten pages: (1) the basis for the court’s subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiff’s claims and defendant’s counterclaims, whether any issues exist regarding personal jurisdiction or venue, whether any parties remain to be served, and, if any parties remain to be served, the date by which service will be completed and an explanation as to why service has not been completed; (2) a brief chronology of the facts and a statement of the principal factual issues in dispute; (3) a brief statement, without extended legal argument, of the disputed points of law, including reference to specific statutes and decisions; (4) all prior and pending motions, their
current status, and any anticipated motions; (5) the extent to which parties, claims, or defenses are expected to be added or dismissed and a proposed deadline for amending the pleadings; (6) whether there has been full and timely compliance with the initial disclosure requirements of Fed. R.
Civ. P. 26 and a description of the disclosures made; (7) discovery taken to date, the scope of anticipated discovery, any proposed limitations or modifications of the discovery rules, and a proposed discovery plan pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f); (8) any related cases or proceedings pending before another judge of this court, or before another court or administrative body; (9) all relief sought by the complaint or counterclaim, including the amount of any damages sought and a description of the bases on which damages are calculated. In addition, any party from whom damages are sought must describe the bases on which it contends damages should be calculated if liability is established; (10) whether each party has filed the “Certification as to Interested Parties or Persons” required by the Local Rules. In addition, each party must restate in the joint report the contents of its certification by identifying any persons, firms, partnerships, corporations (including
parent corporations) or other entities known by the party to have either: (i) a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding; or (ii) any other kind of interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding; (11) an appropriate last date for the completion of discovery and the hearing of motions, a date for a final pretrial conference and a trial date; (12) whether the case will be tried to a jury or to the Court and a preliminary estimate of the time required for trial; (13) efforts made to settle or resolve the case to date, and the parties’ views as to an appropriate plan for maximizing settlement prospects; (14) whether the case is complex or requires reference to the procedures set forth in the Manual on Complex Litigation; (15) what motions the parties are likely to make that may be dispositive or partially dispositive; (16) any unusual legal issues presented by the case; and (17) proposals regarding severance, bifurcation, or other ordering of proof.”

I’m hoping to bifurcate the discovery of my dispositive jurisdictional severance motion.
Let’s see how the State Department likes that!! 🙃
In the meantime, we wait.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x