ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: Mar 7 – Berkeley, April 18 – Phone,
May 29/30 – Conference (Los Angeles),  June 13 – Sacramento details

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Los Angeles, Sacramento, Phone)

2020 ACSOL Conference – May 29/30 in Los Angeles

General News

International Travel 2020

In this International Travel 2020 post, the information is identical to the International Travel 2019 post. We added a new post for 2020 in order to keep the discussion manageable. Please help us by sticking to the topic of International Travel only.


From 2019: We have updated our main International Travel section. It features:

  1. List of Schengen Nations (allowing entry to registrants);
  2. Resources (including a CA DOJ Travel Notification Form); and
  3. User Submitted Travel Reports.

This post is linked from the Main Menu at the top of the site.

1. The 26 Schengen Nations (which allow registrants to visit)

As an agreement, Schengen was signed among the five out of ten countries of the European Union members back then, on the 14th June 1985. Under the Schengen agreement, travelling from one Schengen country to another is done without any passport and immigration controls or any other formalities previously required.

Czech republic

Note: US Citizens are visa exempt when visiting the Schengen area for up to 90 days in a 180 day period (List of Countries, Section B or map).  The European Commission is proposing creating a European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) for such travelers, beginning in 2021 – which may or may not take criminal convictions into account. ETIAS Fact Sheet April 2018July 2018

2. Resources



Older Posts


Join the discussion

  1. James

    Anyone know current status of passport issuance in 2020? I received my first passport last year without the identifier and it was revoked after I traveled. Once this happened, I started researching the issue (wish I had done this earlier!). According to the regulations, the Secretary of State was not authorized by law to issue the passport without it, nevertheless, mine was issued anyway. Instead of correcting their error, they simply revoked it with the only remedy for me being to reapply. I fought this in correspondence and via calls to them, to no avail. In resignation I ended up reapplying.

    My question is this: Are they still making this error on people’s passports? My advice to anyone who was issued a passport without the required statement, but who haven’t yet had their passports revoked, use the “Correct a data or printing error” option on their website while your passport is still valid. Perhaps you might have a chance to get it remedied before they revoke it. Once that happens, however, you’re out of luck it seems.

    Is there the possibility of a class-action suit for those of us who have been wronged by the State Department in this manner? Why should we have to pay twice for a passport that should have been printed correctly the first time? The law seems to be on our side in this regard.

  2. David

    For those who wish to travel to Europe, apparently, ETIAS may be delayed and may not start until 2022:


  3. MatthewLL

    Anyone with experience with being removed from a state registry and still been detained or denied entry? My state of Washington will remove me automatically (I will verify it happens according to statute) in a year for a misdemeanor offense, and I am waiting to apply for a new passport until then. At that time I will have been on the registry for ten years and not required to register under National SORNA, should not have the tainted passport, and will not have to give notice of international travel (as long as I don’t live in California or similar state). I do not, however, expect there to be clear sailing for everywhere I go in the future.

    About five years ago, with legal paperwork filled out by an attorney, I tried to enter Canada but was turned back at the boarder. I am hoping Canada will allow me in after I am off the registry. I will want to travel elsewhere too. A lot can change between now and then, but am planning ahead.


    • TS


      Read thoroughly online about any conviction before trying to enter Canada again. You may need a Canadian immigration lawyer to help.

    • M C

      @MatthewLL, I’m in they situation myself but haven’t traveled since IML was implemented and here’s where it gets tricky. The term “covered sex offender” is different for the passport marking and the green notice. For the passport marking you have to be on the registry in some state. So if you are not required to register in ANY state, marking your passport would not be possible. The term “covered sex offender” for green notices is anyone who committed a sex offense against a minor. In that case if you are not on a registry or even not subject to Adam Walsh / SORNA anymore due the passage of time they can and do still send out green notices. They appear to fall back on the keyword in the law of may in legal briefs when IML was challenged so it’s also possible they don’t always send out a green notice. If a green notice is sent to certain countries for sex offenses you aren’t getting in. That said, if you are not subjected to registration and 21 day advance travel notices, the angel watch program will get your information solely from passenger manifests which they only have access to for flights leaving, entering, or transiting the USA. Therefore, travel may be possible to other places with indirect travel where you would otherwise be denied.

  4. Worried in Wisconsin

    I’m in the same boat as you James – I had some international travel planned so I applied for a new passport early about 1-1/2 years ago, hoping to get a marked one and avoid the revocation. Of course, they sent one without the marking. I ran this all the way up the flag pole with our state registration specialist, who checked with her contacts in the fed offices (US Marshals, etc.). The instruction they provided was to have me continue using the new passport, and when/if it was revoked they’d let me know. Great.

    I traveled overseas at the end of last year, and still have not received a revocation letter. They did the usual secondary screening at the airport when I got back, but that was all. In fact, I’ve submitted notification for another trip overseas (about 5 weeks ago), and so far nothing from the feds. Not sure what to make of it. Maybe I haven’t made the Angel Watch list yet? Maybe they just haven’t gotten to my name yet?

    For anyone that has reapplied after revocation… What was the process? How long did it take to get a marked passport? Did you have to do anything special to get the marked passport after revocation or did it just arrive that way automatically?

    I don’t see anything on the passport application where we can indicate why we’re reapplying, so it would be up to them to figure it out.

    • David

      @ Worried in Wisconsin: I traveled back and forth to Europe two or three times on my old passport before finally receiving a revocation letter from the State Department. I then took that letter to one of the local passport centers (it happened to be located in a nearby public library) and met with the clerk there and explained the situation (which she had never heard of before). We sent in the passport paperwork along with the required photo and a copy of the revocation letter I had received. There was no delay in its processing and I received my new “marked” passport within about 6 – 8 weeks, as I recall.
      (And though I am certainly not happy to have one, I will note that I have not suffered any negative consequences due to the marked passport. In fact, no one in Europe [customs officer, hotel concierge, or car rental clerk] has bothered to flip to the notification page.)
      I hope this information is helpful to you, Worried in Wisconsin. Bon voyage & safe travels to you!!

      • Worried in Wisconsin

        Curious if they returned your old passport after cancelling it (punching holes through it).

        That’s the normal process when renewing a passport, but I’m not sure if they do that with a revocation.

        I’ve got a 1-year visa stuck in mine, and it would be a royal PITA to get a duplicate. First problem would be explaining why I had to get a new passport so soon, and then trying to get back into the country without the physical visa.

        If I can get back my cancelled passport I’d still have the (unexpired) visa to use for re-entry.

        • Axiom

          Just curious-What country in the world would give a registrant a one year visa? Even non sex crime offenders have trouble procuring longterm visas

        • David

          No. Annoyingly, they do not return your revoked passport. ☹️

        • NY won’t let go

          @Axiom a country with common sense.

          I have to go renew my visa next month.

          I haven’t been back to the US in a few years tho

    • Don’t tread on me

      While I am zero expert in this, my understanding is if you are tier 1 or conviction for CP you may not have a mark. I received my first passport without a mark last November and plan to travel internationally soon. If I get a revocation letter I will let everyone know.

    • James

      I sent them my revocation letter with the application so they should have no excuse to mess it up a second time. Still waiting for the new one – should take less than 6 weeks they say. The crazy thing about it is that they never ask for any information from the applicant, nor give any instructions that would help ensure the passport gets issued correctly.

      @Worried in Wisconsin, The revocation process can take months, so I wouldn’t assume you won’t get one. I would try the passport correction option on the Dept of State website and see if you can get a replacement one before you are forced to shell out another $150 for a new one.

  5. Phil D.

    I have a passport without the identifier on it and have been traveling to Mexico to visit wife’s family and always get sent to secondary inspection where I get apologies from the agents for the hassle, (I am Retired Military). So far no issues on passport being revoked.

    • James I

      Dear Phil D:

      I’m not trying to mess you up…if you are getting into Mexico…more power to you! Most people have been unable to travel there…and since I am close in So Cal and do my diving down around there…it it painful to me I can’t drop across the border for fish taco’s or whatever.

      So I ask, but feel free not to answer…are you giving your 21 day notice to your local authorites before you go down to Mexico? When you hit secondary, which I know well, they have not asked for a copy of your 21 day notice?

      I am happy for you….I just wish I could do it also.

      (If you are giving your notice, and Mexico is not hassling you….I also might try)

      James I

      • Phil D.

        James, no not giving any notice. And no hassles, other than Secondary, from Customs about notice copies.

        • Buckeye

          I have been going to Mexico for many years with no problem, My 81 year old mother lives alone on the coast. Last year a agent was waiting for me when I got off the plane, they receive a e mail notice from Mexico city now when ever a flight is coming into a airport from the US with a registrant, they asked a few questions and let me in after what seemed to be a inconvenience for them, this week I get stopped and they say asked for my paper from the US denied my entry and sent me back,, I have been several times in between and they never even stopped me. The law is a pathetic excuse of a politician destroying innocent live, they need to limit this to human trafficking convictions or something,, Idk.

  6. Illinois Contact

    Does anyone have recent experience traveling/vacationing in Puerto Rico (I know it’s not international)?
    The flight there is domestic (no customs or 21 day notice), but do you have to register once there? After how many days? Even if your stay is temporary (a week or two), and you will not be “residing” there.

    • Eli

      I went to Puerto Rico for 5 days last year. Didn’t bother to register. Take your own risk. I’m from Texas so different requirements here.

      3 business days for initial registration and updates. §536c. Residence defined as “the location of a person’s home or the place where the person habitually lives.” §536(13). Those convicted in other jurisdictions “in Puerto Rico by reasons of work or study” required to register w/in 3 calendar days after arrival, “even if such offender does not intend to establish a residence.” §536c. No provision made for visitors.

      • Illinois Contact

        @Eli May I pursue this a little about Puerto Rico. First, thanks for your reply. I agree with you that the PR law does not require a visitor (other than student/work) to register, but you never know if the local police will read the law the same as you, or just ignore it and decide to hassle you.

        I assume you informed the police where you register in Texas of your plans, and told them the address where you were staying in Puerto Rico. Do you know if they called the local police in PR, and told them about you? My local police always do, and then I get a phone call from the local PD after I arrive to remind me of the local rules. If they did alert the RP police, do you have any indication that they pursued this, sought you out, etc? I’m planning on not telling the PR police when I arrive, but wonder what potential trouble that might cause.

        • David

          @ Illinois Contact: Why would you notify your home registering agency of travel WITHIN the United States (which includes P.R.)?
          I don’t notify my local agency when I visit family or friends out of state for a few days – it’s not required.

        • Eli

          I dont know if the police here contact other state lines… I am on probation and I have to get permission to travel which is not an issue since I am following my conditions…. my probation tells me to make sure I contact the local police of my travel plans. I dont think probation bother to check in on my travels unless there is reason of suspicion or I get in trouble of law enforcement.

          That being said, I ask my local police many times if I need to report my plans traveling for just few days stay and they said I dont have to give them notice. I never talk to the police where I am traveling to because then they may want my information and want me to check in from another state. (hell no)

  7. Worried in Wisconsin

    There are discrepancies between many state laws and the federal law with regard to providing notice if you are going to be away from your home for more than XX number of nights. For example, Wisconsin doesn’t require notification until I’m away from my registered residence for 10 nights, but the SORNA guidelines call for notification for 7 or more nights. More than once I’ve provided notification the our state’s registry for a 7 or 8 night trip, only to have them tell me it’s not necessary. I have to remind them I’m doing this to comply with the federal requirement. Would really suck to get stopped for a traffic violation on the 9th day and end up in custody because I didn’t do this.

    This doesn’t really apply to the current conversation though, as ALL international travel requires notice 21 days in advance, with few exceptions.

    • David

      @ Worried: I don’t know – it sounds like some people pop over the border to Mexico regularly without giving notification and without getting into any trouble. 🤔

      • Eli

        I’ve noticed that the more information I give, nothing good comes out of it. Exercise with caution. Don’t give out anything more than what required to. Example the police wanted my passport for Puerto Rico I told them I’m using my state ID. Yeah right I’m not surrendering my passport for them to log my passport information in.

        • James I

          Yes, Eli, smart people here…and yet, good information does get passed along. Such as yours just now…keep your passport number as private as possible…that’s interesting, but probably very good advice.

          Likewise, people that are able to negotiate by whatever means Mexico…good for them. I presume they are driving across….but I wouldn’t do it regardless, risk/reward.

          Circling back to Puerto Rico….maybe I read the Puerto Rico statute wrong, but I would have thought that within 3 days I had to register….I will look at it again; if I am wrong, I’ll be winging it to PR myself…lol

          (I have been waiting this out…waiting for the tiered system to come into being…but learning now that the fact that I don’t have a Static 99 Score and so may add two more years even though I have a full 1203.4 expungement, withdrawal of guilty plea, has left me a little embittered and so I have got to start doing what I can now…and PR really looks nice…if it is okay and not 3 days).

          Best Wishes, James I

      • Worried in Wisconsin

        What people do and get away with isn’t how I base my life nowadays.

        The law is clear – you MUST provide 21 days notice of international travel, with very few exceptions. Popping across the border to do a little shopping is not an exception that I’ve seen anywhere.

        • M C

          @worried, I don’t think WI takes or submits for the 21 day though at least for now. That’s what the SORNA compliance tables on say anyway.

      • Buckeye

        I have been going to Mexico for many years with no problem, My 81 year old mother lives alone on the coast. Last year a agent was waiting for me when I got off the plane, they receive a e mail notice from Mexico city now when ever a flight is coming into a airport from the US with a registrant, they asked a few questions and let me in after what seemed to be a inconvenience for them, this week I get stopped and they asked for my paper from the US, which i did not even know about until now and they denied my entry and sent me back on the next flight. I have been several times in between and they never even stopped me. The law is a pathetic excuse of a politician destroying innocent lives, they need to limit this to human trafficking convictions or something,, Idk.

        • Will Allen

          Sorry to hear about your problems. Fuck these idiot politicians. Their only goal is to grow big government and harass people. That’s it. They are lying sacks of sh*t when they say they are trying to protect people. Further, if that were actually their goal, then they truly are idiots of shocking proportions.

          But I’d never say anything like “they need to limit this to …” because they are too stupid to limit anything. Do you really trust them to be moral and competent? Nope. We need to take any their power permanently. Politicians are a danger to free people.

          Message to Registry Supporters/Terrorists: Sic semper tyrannis. Here’s a famous quote for you – “You think you can be ruthless? Let’s see how you like it when the fighting is brought to you.”

  8. TR

    Never volunteer information more than what is needed.

    • Illinois Contact

      @Eli and @James I

      This was just posed on Illinois Voices For Reform:

      Our contact at our affiliate in Virginia just returned from Puerto Rico-

      From: JP Welch

      I just returned from Puerto Rico and, when registering, asked for the related law. The link I was provided is, the same document Mike quoted below. In Spanish, it’s:

      El ofensor sexual deberá notificar personalmente a la Comandancia de la Policía, de la jurisdicción donde reside, cualquier cambio en su nombre, información vehicular, dirección temporal o permanente de su residencia, de su empleo o de su estatus de estudiante, dentro de un término de tres (3) días laborables de ocurrir dicho cambio; o en el caso de una persona de otro país que haya sido convicta por delitos sexuales o abuso contra menores por un tribunal de su país, federal, militar o estatal que establezca su residencia en Puerto Rico, o que por razón de trabajo o estudio se encuentre en Puerto Rico, aunque su intención no sea la de establecer residencia, y tiene la obligación de registrarse, deberá cumplimentar el registro dentro de los siguientes tres (3) días de haber llegado a Puerto Rico.

      Google Translate renders it:

      The sex offender must personally notify the Police Command, of the jurisdiction where he resides, any change in his name, vehicular information, temporary or permanent address of his residence, of his employment or of his student status, within a term of three (3) working days of said change; or in the case of a person from another country who has been convicted of sexual offenses or abuse against minors by a court of their country, federal, military or state that establishes their residence in Puerto Rico, or who by reason of work or study is If you are in Puerto Rico, even if your intention is not to establish residence, and you have the obligation to register, you must complete the registration within three (3) days of arriving in Puerto Rico.

      Registration occurs in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico state police region where you’ll be residing – in my case, Bayamon, west of San Juan. The process is fairly straightforward, staff was professional and friendly. The registering agent couldn’t speak English, but was able to quickly round up a translator. Uber seems to be generally available in the northeast around San Juan. I was able to get service quickly from Dorado to Bayamon and return.

      As stated below, the point of contact is Lcda. Coralys E. Cruz Dominguez at I was told by the agent completing the registration that my registry information would be removed when I departed Puerto Rico. I left on Friday and it’s still posted.

      My reply:

      Thanks. Very helpful, and encouraging (the professional and friendly description). I suppose it may depend on your definition of “country.” Someone said they consider the mainland US to be another country.

      I will take the same steps. I have learned the nearest PD to my hotel and even the name of a contact there.

      I still don’t think the law requires it, but whatever.

      • NPS

        I was supposed to go to Puerto Rico to visit family during the holidays, and my attorney advised me not to go. The “no provision for visitors” is not in the law and this is only our interpretation of it. You still must register even if you are going there for vacation. My family went to PR without me. My mom asked the authorities in the city she stayed (central PR). Would I still have to register even if it was a week’s vacation? They confirmed that I would have had to register within 72 hours of arriving.

        It seems it is now confirmed that they publicly list vacationers. DON’T go to Puerto Rico if you still are a registrant.

  9. R M

    “I just returned from Puerto Rico and, when registering, asked for the related law. The link I was provided is

    Their law enforcement provided a google link instead of the actual law? I don’t question Lexus but why?

  10. R M

    “The “no provision for visitors” is not in the law…”. IE, there is no provision legally.

  11. TD

    If im reading my paperwork correctly after i register. When it comes to international travel you have to inform them 21 days before you leave, if you will stay longer than 7 days in another country. Im in Michigan.
    Anybody else out there read it this way? Sounds to me as long as your back on the 7th day you dont have to give the 21 days notice. Maybe this is Michigan law and the Fed law reads different. I haven’t seen the Fed law in writing.

    • Don’t tread on me

      Nope…. the 21 day advanced notice is a federal requirement. You can review the requirements here
      The state of Michigan says you can go anywhere domestically for 7 days without notifying them. Be aware that whatever state you go to has it’s own requirements. Most are if you are in their state for 2 or 3 days you must register there as well. All of this only applies if you are not on probation or parole. I strongly urge you to study the requirements before traveling. The consequences for getting any of it wrong could be years in prison. NARSOL website has a state wiki at
      It will enable you to study each state’s requirements

      • TS

        You can look under the legal tab at the top of this website which gives the States and territory requirements for registration within each entity. It also includes the much discussed topic of 3 day notification to the federal government at the bottom of the 1st page.

        • someone who cares

          What I don’t understand is, if the Federal law is different from the State Law, and the Federal law always applies, why is there even a State law?

        • M C

          @someonewhocares, both the state and the federal law always apply. What complicates things is that much of the registration and reporting requirements fall on the states which have no obligation to follow the federal requirements and mainly don’t unless they first write the requirements into the state law. So you then have states that don’t even have a way to comply with the federal requirements and states that have even more strict requirements than the federal law and it makes everything so complicated not even judges understand it.

        • Worried in Wisconsin

          There is also a 7 day rule spelled out in the Final Guidelines with reference to temporary/travel registration. My reading is that the 3-day rule is if you are changing your residence, not merely traveling away from your home location.

          Do you have information that states the 3-day rule applies for vacation travel? If so, it would contradict the 7-day rule mentioned elsewhere.

        • TS

          @Worried in WI

          It merely shows more ambiguity whether 3 v 7 days is (more) correct and what is defined as a vacation v change in residence. It is a discussion we’ve had here before and, I believe, it is still confusing to most, understandably.

      • Dennis

        Dont tread on me,

        Michigan doesn’t require 21 day notice even when traveling internationally, unless you will be gone for more than 7 days. It’s in the Michigan SORA Law. That’s where Michigan and Federal Sorna have different requirements. Before I came to this site, I traveled internationally a lot! But, I wasnt gone for more than 7 days. The other countries get notified regardless , once they see your name on flight manifest. But follow Sorna. Wouldn’t want to give bad advice

        Never had an issue with the Federal Marshall’s, etc upon return. I’m not saying to do this, but just goes to show they mainly target those who do interstate travel (ie, change residence to a different state without notifying that State, EVEN if the State you come from has relieved you of the registration requirement).

        • Matt

          I have friends who work for the airlines, so I take last minute standby trips with them because they are FREE. They are almost always spur of the moment(ie, ticket is booked the same day). This is how standby works. Sometimes, there is no way to give 21 day notice, because even You dont know that far in advance.

        • Don’t tread on me

          Dennis, I’m not sure why you directed this to me. The federal govt requires a 21 day advanced notice. To report international travel you go to the same sheriff dept where you typically register. If you travel internationally, are from Michigan and only leave for 6 days you still MUST report international travel to the sheriff dept. 21 days in advance in order to comply with the federal government requirements. If you travel internationally and are gone for more than 7 days, giving the 21 day advanced notice for the feds also satisfies the states requirement of telling the state you will be away from home more than 7 days.

  12. TS


    Fed law: 21 days notification prior to international travel. Stay duration doesn’t matter. Regardless of what MI says, 21 days.

  13. Worried in Wisconsin

    @someone who cares

    State law will always apply in the state. Federal law doesn’t usually apply until you cross a state line.

    For example, I can travel for up to 10 days in Wisconsin without having to notify our registry people that I’m away from home. But if I cross into a neighboring state, I’ve got to be concerned about the Federal rules which set the limit at 7 days.

    There have been cases with other types of violations where the Feds have tried to prosecute cases that didn’t involve crossing a state line by invoking the Interstate Commerce laws, but I don’t know if that’s been done for a registration violation yet.

  14. Worried in Wisconsin

    @M C

    Wisconsin most certainly does take the 21 day notification of international travel. Talk to your registration specialist (not the office in Madison). There is no form, so you have to do this on your own by gathering the necessary information. One nice thing about Wisconsin is that you can provide this type of thing by fax or email, and if you ask the registration specialist will send you a confirmation once things are processed.

    I’ve done this a number of times, and they will forward to information to the US Marshal’s office.

    • M C

      @worried, I’m not required to register in WI so I don’t have a registration specialist to talk to so I’m only going off of what the federal data says and that says they don’t get 21 day notices from Wisconsin. If your experience is different and they accept them then you would need to provide that 21 day notice as required under the federal law.

      • Worried in Wisconsin

        I couldn’t tell you what the feds do with the information once they receive it, but I know two things:

        1) I get confirmation from the registration specialist that my information has been forwarded to the feds.
        2) When I get to passport control on the other end it is clear that they’ve received notification from the US about my arrival.

        Perhaps the data you’re looking at shows things the way it does because Wisconsin is not a SORNA compliant state. What makes it confusing and complicated for registrants in Wisconsin is that we are still expected to obey the Federal rules even though we are not a SORNA state.

        I’m pretty sure that my return trips would be more problematic when I go through secondary screening if I had not submitted the required notification. The agents have a record that I’ve submitted it, so something must be working behind the scenes that your data source doesn’t show.

  15. Worried in Wisconsin


    Be careful with those spur of the moment trips. You never know when they’ll catch on and have someone waiting for you on your return. According to the SORNA guidelines, states are permitted to make exceptions to the 21 days notice rule, but even then you’d be required to do something.

    One of the big points in the IML lawsuits was how the 21 day rule would severely limit a registrant’s ability to travel for emergency and last minute trips.

    • TS

      We have discussed here fervently before the less than 21 day advance notice exceptions. There are entries here in this forum under International Travel which give the respective citation where states can make exceptions to less than 21 day notification. You also can look up online the Fed Register text ( specifically which states what the AG gave as examples of exceptions to 21 day notification, but left it in the state’s hands to decide validity of the exception. Jump seat or standby flights for general vacations sounds nice, but would still need to be reported with an accompanying exception for less than 21 days, e.g. family emergency, job related emergency, etc. I won’t say whether last minute vacation travel because of a free ticket is acceptable or not, but would be interested if someone is successful with it when reported with an exception provided.

      • TS

        Will add, the state office for accepting exceptions has to run them by the SMART office as noted in the above cited doc.

        Again, you can find in this forum the discussions previously had on this topic with others.

        • Will Allen

          I have read little of the actual laws (or even good debates right here!) about this 21 day stupidity. I do see what you are saying is correct. However, I do fully expect that they would be REQUIRED to accommodate a person who just wakes up one morning and decides that he/she wants to leave the country that day, with no reason other than he/she simply wants to.

          I have not seen anything where a person is requesting “permission” to leave. A person is simply telling big government that they are leaving. I find it very hard to believe that a person must have some “valid” reason that he/she wants to leave, if they want to leave sooner than 21 days.

          So it seems to me that if you did decide that you’d just like to leave the country the same day that you’d still have to tell the criminal regime about it, but that would be it.

          I read a bit of the Supplemental Guidelines that you gave a link for. It certainly does give some solid examples. However, I’m not going to waste much time reading it until/unless I might need it one day for some reason. I feel like anyone with an I.Q. over 100 who reads such documents or “$EX offender” “laws” is likely harmed just by the sheer stupidity of it. It is stupefying and offensive to anyone with a working brain. And the scumbags just can’t say “sex offender” too much. I’m not going to respect anyone like that or treat them as legitimate.

          To save some people from some possible brain damage, I’ll include just a very brief part of the Guidelines that are relevant:

          While notice of international travel will generally be required as described above, it is recognized that requiring 21 days 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.

          All of this is unacceptable. Because of this harassment, I’m going to continue taking real actions in real life as often as possible to ensure that there are negative consequences to the general public. Everyone must pay. My patience with the criminals has ended. They say I’m a monster, so be it.

          Sic semper tyrannis.

  16. Worried in Wisconsin


    The SORNA Final Guidelines make a clear distinction between a residence and temporary lodging.

    As provided in SORNA § 111(13), residence refers to “the location of the individual’s home or other place where the individual habitually lives.”

    Regarding temporary lodging:

    “The authority under SORNA § 114(a)(7) is accordingly exercised to provide that jurisdictions must require sex offenders to provide information about any place in which the sex offender is staying when away from his residence for seven or more days…”

    Note that the temporary lodging section mentions that this is when the offender “is staying away from his residence”, which would mean to me that they are talking about two distinct and different things.

    Therefore, my take on this is when the Guidelines state:

    “Section 113(c) provides that a sex offender must, not later than three business days after each change of name, residence, employment, or student status, appear in person in at least one jurisdiction…”

    They are clearly talking about a change in residence, not a temporary lodging. The essence of temporary lodging is just that, temporary.

    Now that said, I’m sure that some states will have totally different understandings of all this, as might some local jurisdictions. For example, Milwaukee defines residence as “the place where one sleeps”. According to the city attorney, that means if you sleep somewhere for one night, it’s your residence. Of course, the federal rules wouldn’t change just because the local rules do, but it’s important to keep track of all the various layers to this game so that they have nothing to ding us on.

    • TS

      @Worried in WI

      Fully agree.

    • David

      LOL! This is yet another example of how complicated and convoluted sex offender laws have become. Here, “Worried WI”, gives us the federal SORNA rules, but then, each state has their own rules as well. So WTF!??

  17. Dennis

    You know how Michigan and other states let you know of your requirements, especially when you go to register? It says 21 day notice, if you are gone for more than 7 days right on the paperwork. I do get where you are coming from tho.

    My question is this: What if you never come on this site? How the heck would you know the federal requirement if Michigan and other states do not tell you, and if you never received a notice from the federal government? I’m aware that many of us know, ONLY because we visit this site. But, if you didn’t, how the heck would you know this requirement? We’re talking about over 800,000 registrants. Did anyone get a letter in the mail from the Fed. My State never told me anything, and the only law I have, is the one I sign every 90 days when i register. They never have at once mentioned or put on paper the federal requirement. You can’t just say “you’re expected to know”. Thats bs

    • Worried in Wisconsin


      Agree 100%

      The system as it stands is totally unworkable. There are so many layers involved (federal, state, county, city, etc.) that it’s nearly impossible to know if one is in total compliance. Sometimes it’s not even possible to be in total compliance due to requirements that cannot be met or due to requirements that are in conflict.

      I suspect that in any other area of law this would have been shot down in a quick minute. Not with SO laws though, as they seem to trigger one of those emotional spots that no politician dare cross.


      You are correct – the feds do not make any effort to notify registrants of any responsibilities, but is quick to file charging documents should a line be crossed (both figuratively and literally, as in crossing a state line). The federal law only requires states to notify registrants of their duty to register at the beginning of the process (upon release, etc).

      Complicating all of this is that the feds don’t handle the registration, but rather leave it to the states. However, federal law does require those convicted of sex offenses to register:

      (a) JURISDICTION TO MAINTAIN A REGISTRY.—Each jurisdiction
      shall maintain a jurisdiction-wide sex offender registry conforming
      to the requirements of this title.
      (b) GUIDELINES AND REGULATIONS.—The Attorney General shall
      issue guidelines and regulations to interpret and implement this
      (a) IN GENERAL.—A sex offender shall register, and keep the
      registration current, in each jurisdiction where the offender resides,
      where the offender is an employee, and where the offender is
      a student. For initial registration purposes only, a sex offender
      shall also register in the jurisdiction in which convicted if such
      jurisdiction is different from the jurisdiction of residence.
      (b) INITIAL REGISTRATION.—The sex offender shall initially

      I think that part (or all) of the problem is general understanding that SORNA was designed to push states to comply in order to retain all of their funding from the feds. But, there were also specific requirements for individual registrants to follow.

      Then there are the “Guidelines”, which only serve to further complicate the mess. The federal rules were written with so much vagueness that compliance wasn’t always possible without further clarification, so the Guidelines have been issued. Also, the actual law leaves the details up to the Attorney General, and those details have been published in their ongoing changes to the rules which are discussed in these Guidelines. I consider the Guidelines to be laws until something else comes along and contradicts them.

  18. Travel to Italy

    Considering travel to Italy – hopefully before ETIAS kicks in – my husband doesn’t have the marked passport – do I need to be concerned that it’s not marked when traveling to Schengen nations now? (I figure it’ll change with ETIAS)

    • Mike G

      Traveling to Italy (or any Schengen country) is no problem right now, whether your passport is marked or not.

      If your husband is supposed to have a marked passport, his current one may be revoked when you return from your trip.

  19. Worried in Wisconsin

    @Will Allen

    Do you have any case law that demonstrates the RIGHT of a US citizen to leave the country?

    I’ve searched for it, and so far have only found case law to show that travel between the states cannot be impeded. If there was case law to show that we have a right to travel internationally, your argument would be much stronger.

    From what I’ve read, it seems that the feds are in control of the ports and our passports, and there is nothing much to our ability to leave the country. I’d love to learn of something if you know of it.

    • JohnDoeUtah

      International travel is a privilege, not a fundamental right.

      • TS

        @Worried in WI and JDUtah

        Travel abroad is a right. See doc below from Fordham Univ Law Review on it since we’ve discussed it here in this forum previously. Can read the PDF hopefully through that link or straight up search for it.

      • David

        @ JohnDoeUtah:. It appears the American Bar Association disagrees with you:.

        Just Google “Is travel a right?”

      • TS

        Splitting hairs here…

        @JDUtah said a “fundamental right” which interstate travel is known as (see footnote 136 in Fordham Univ doc), but international travel is a “right” as seen in the Fordham Univ doc on par with other rights Americans have.

        • JohnDoeUtah

          @ This about sums it up:

          “Analogizing to Williams v. Fears,21 in which the Supreme Court connected interstate travel to the “liberty” of the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment,2 2 the Bauer court stated that “it is difficult to see where, in principle, freedom to travel outside the United States is any less an attribute of personal liberty. “23 However, the court cautioned that the right to travel abroad was not an absolute liberty, but was subject to reasonable regulation, over which the Secretary of State had “wide,” though not absolute, discretion.”

          So a regulation limiting or severely restricting the right to travel internationally is definitely allowed because it is not an “absolute right” like interstate travel.

          However, this makes me wonder about a challenge to IML.

          “Judge Fahy, who sat on the Baiter panel,20 later commented that, in setting aside the revocation of the plaintiff’s passport unless a hearing was granted within a reasonable time, “Baiter thus applied the standards of procedural due process to the methods by which the federal government could restrict travel; that is, the right to travel was held to be a liberty protected by the Fifth Amendment from deprivation without a hearing.’2

          The government will of course try to point back to the conviction as satisfying the “hearing” requirement, like they have done to justify such with regard to the registry. However, I think we could argue that because travel restrictions were not an issue at the time of trial, and were created post-conviction, that the hearing/conviction was an insufficient forum to ensure due process rights to a hearing to challenge the government’s action of restricting travel, etc.

          Because IML does not include a hearing or due process method, and only a vague grievance procedure, it violates 5th amendment due process.

    • M C

      @Worried, there is no constitutional right to international travel per se and there is actually plenty of case law that says the opposite is in fact true. Your passport may be revoked and travel restricted without due process and international travel can be denied as a punishment for crimes as well as owing child support. Some which require compelling reasons for denial of travel. That said there are also things that would prevent such restrictions on an RSO once punishment has been completed because if denied as a punishment is certainly ex post facto at that point. Then there is also the International Bill of Human Rights which is agreed to by UN member states which does provide for the right to leave and return to your country. The problem with the case law when it comes to an RSO is that they could invoke a national security reason for travel denial which if courts agrees is a valid argument would impede such travel as it’s supported by alot of case law. This may be difficult but is probably not impossible for our government to accomplish.

      • TS

        @M C

        I would like to see a national security argument attempted in court where it is applied to a person impacted by the ledger LE and Legislators think is required. If the person they are trying to apply it to does not have any national security background, then that argument ought to fall apart on its face in court. You cannot just deem a person a national security threat while attempting to leave the country without due process which should include an assessment of them and their background. Of course, our government would try it because they can…

        The same is said for those impacted by IML too of course in principle…

    • Will Allen

      I don’t. As I said in my comment, I’m not really messing with it much. I’ll figure it out when/if I must.

      I have to apologize a bit for the people who have put in a lot of effort to try to figure out the international travel. I didn’t want to jump into the conversation and try to make anyone discuss anything that has already been discussed in detail (that I could read). So I was really just making more of a comment and giving an opinion.

      Regarding that, I can understand that a country ought to be able to control how its citizens come and go from the country. It’s a pact or agreement among all of us citizens. We obligate ourselves as a country that if one of our citizens has trouble outside of our borders, that we will help. Our country has to maintain diplomatic, sovereign relationships with the places that our citizens visit. Etc.

      So I can agree with a country’s right to control how its citizens come and go. The problem is that I do have a RIGHT to travel just as much as anyone else does. Their baseless, fact-less harassment of my travel is not legitimate. It is nothing but an attack on my RIGHT as any citizen to travel as I like. Same with domestic travel, BTW.

      There is nothing legitimate about the restrictions. It is exactly the same as if big government decided today that any person who has EVER been convicted of drunk driving has to give a 21 day notice. No difference. It’s an attack by an illegitimate, illegal government.

      I do think it is hilarious that the Registry Supporters/Terrorists are trying to keep me in this country. That’s convenient because the terrorists that I want to harm are in this country. So I’ll travel around it and deliver chaos and problems. There are so, so many places to be in the country where the terrorists are. I’ll be visiting one early tomorrow for a couple or few days.

      Sic semper tyrannis.

      • David

        @ Will Allen: If IML is determined to restrict our international travel, we should all vacation (while spending as little money AS POSSIBLE) in Chris Smith’s New Jersey Congressional District. He pushed so hard for the IML – he and his constituents should have to suffer the repercussions of it. 😠

  20. R M

    Go to any international border and try to cross (walking, in a vehicle (bus, truck, car, etc.), or flying… anything short of digging a tunnel or similar), without a passport and see what happens. Our “right” to travel international is at our governments discretion; that does not sound like a “right” to me.

    • Will Allen

      That is not the right we are wondering about. Of course any country can restrict who enters it.

      What we are wondering is if our scumbag federal government can keep us from traveling the world as we see fit. This is our country and if enough of us say “no”, then they cannot. Until/unless that happens, I will continue to treat them as the illegal enemy operation that they are and act appropriately.

      Sic semper tyrannis.

  21. David

    @ Will Allen:. If they are bent on us not leaving the U.S., we should all vacation (while spending as little money AS POSSIBLE) in Chris Smith’s New Jersey district. He pushed for the IML – he and his constituents should have to suffer the repercussions of it. Let’s have a huge Registrant Conference there….. And we’ll let everyone know we’re there because of Chris Smith! 😠

  22. M C

    A little over a year ago Steve posted about Green Notice requirements namely Article 89 of the rules on processing of data. So to some extent this is a re-hash of something old but I want to discuss it again. The rule specifically requires an assessment to determine ones threat to public safety in order to send out a green notice on someone. The green notice sent as part of IML would fail to meet requirements for such a notice because it is a blanket notice that applies to all RSO by how it triggers a green notice without an actual assessment. Further, the tiers in SORNA that these notices mostly rely on are not an assessment of ones danger to public safety but simply puts different types of offenses in different categories which have absolutely no value in predicting recidivism. So how are these notices even allowed by Interpol (unless Interpol first changes its rules)? And what can we do, if anything, to demand Interpol stop allowing IML green notices from the United States until assessments are actually performed in accordance with the rules rather than being sent based on the US code in IML that generates a blanket green notice without the required assessment. I think this is important for two reasons. 1. An assessment of actual danger to public safety can be more easily challenged by experts in court on an individual basis over blanket rules in IML and 2. A country which assumes the United States is following the assessment requirements in accordance with the Interpol rules is relying on this assessment for their admissibility decision and assumes the threat to public safety is in significant enough after an assessment that a green notice still needed to be sent. The green notice is in fact worse than even the passport marking in this regard because while the passport marking notifies a country that you simply committed a sex crime in the past, the green notice suggests that you are likely to commit one in the future based on a supposed assessment that never even occured.

    • TS

      @M C

      Ask Interpol. Using their methods against them, ask how can they do this. Once you know, people here probably will write in to help change it. This text above is a good start to Interpol.

      • M C

        @TS, I may do this depending on where this discussion goes. I’m not sure where it ended and want to know others thoughts.

      • David

        @ M C: You make good points, especially #2. I will send a FOIA Request to the Washington D.C. branch of Interpol, citing Article 89, and asking them what process they use to individually assess each U.S. registrant before sending the green notice. (Information from my previous FOIA Requests suggest that the U.S. Marshal Service transmits the “green notices” to Washington D.C. Interpol who then transmit them to the Interpol branch in the target/destination country.)

      • TS

        I would dare to say Interpol does what the USMS, DOJ, and/or DOS says needs to happen because there is money on the line from the US Dept of State as shown here:

        “The European Commission, Global Affairs Canada and the US Department of State are among our main donors of voluntary (cash) funding in recent years.”

        Due Process? whatever…money talks when bullsh*t walks in lack thereof due process…

        However, I hope that David gets some answers to shed light on the little guy behind the green curtain making decisions.

  23. David

    For what it’s worth, the bureacrats who responded to one of my FOIA requests to the U.S. Marshals Service seemed overly concerned about receiving any complaints. So, yes, of course, I’ll be filing a complaint. 😊

  24. Eli

    Just out of curiosity, if your state doesn’t require for you to report to them if its less than 3 days trip, how would the state and federal know how long you stayed traveling state by state for less than 3 days sorna requirement? Could this be a loophole for state by state travels? Even if some states have laws in place that you can visit 3 times out of the year or for 7-14 days total before required to register. anyone have knowledge on this?

    • Earl

      I’ve had the same thoughts. You can travel for months from state to state without technically violating their rules, but I don’t know how your home state woul d look upon it. Be back in time for your yearly registration? If I did try out this strategy, I wouldn’t leave any paper trail of where I traveled.Another question along the same lines is what if I gave my 21 day notice to move overseas disavowing any connection to my home state, move back to the US a few months later, but a different state, and don’t stay in that state long enough to register, move on to another state repeating the process over and over again. Is that technically legal?

    • Worried in Wisconsin

      You’d still be violating the Federal law which requires notification to at least one jurisdiction you’re registered in if you’re away from your residence for 7 or more days. Hence the reason i always let the Wisconsin team know if I’m traveling for longer. They don’t need an exact address, just the states (and cities, if known.)

      I’ve talked with the registration specialist about how to handle driving truck, and she said that some people on the registry send an email or call every time they stop overnight to be sure they don’t get caught up. Too easy to get caught when stopped for something routine like a scale house or roadside DOT inspection.

  25. MLinCA

    I have a question concerning passports.
    I received my passport without the endorsement. If I travel and my passport is revoked, do I have to pay for the replacement passport?
    I thought I read that if you submit it for corrections it will be corrected without charge? Is that true?

    • Ts


      You’re on the hook for the replacement passport even if revoked. They won’t see it as an error.

    • David

      Correction of error vs. revocation by statute are two different things. In answer, yes, you will have to pay the full price for a new (uniquely identified) passport if your current passport is revoked. And, no, they do not provide you with a discount or a refund for the unused portion of you current (unmarked) passport.

    • James

      @MLinCA If you received your passport after the IML endorsement went into effect (2017) I think you have a strong case to argue that your passport has a printing error and to request a free replacement with the endorsement (provided the endorsement should have been there in the first place). There is an online form to request a correction for a data and printing issue:

      Corrections can only be made while the passport is still valid, so if you want to save yourself an extra $150, I would try it. Please let this forum know if this works for you. The Department of State is systematically issuing invalid passports without the endorsement, and I have to conclude it is intended as a way to penalize us further. Don’t let them do this to you and make them correct their error. If you don’t and play dice with hoping you won’t get a revocation letter, all I can say is “good luck” and be forewarned that they know full well what they are doing to us. Once your passport is revoked, consider yourself another victim of the “State Dept. Passport Scam”.

      • M C

        @James,. I don’t think the state department is intentionally not issuing them correctly. Instead, because Angel Watch Center has to certify someone as covered, AWC is not actually cross checking the passport applications sent to the State Department. Therefore, until you travel AWC is not really aware of the passport but when you do they notify the State Department to revoke it. That said, one could maybe try make a ex post facto claim about the revocation being punishment as part of challenging the IML as a whole as punishment.

        • James

          @MC I would agree with you, that is probably the way they are choosing to handle it, however, if I decided not to pay my income taxes until I receive a letter from the IRS, I would be no less culpable. The Dept. Of State does not have the authority to issue invalid passports; the regulation doesn’t give them a loophole for any reason. So if I apply for a passport and receive one, I have every right to expect it to remain valid until it expires. Mine was valid for less than a year. To me, this appears to be willful disregard for the regulations, and then correcting their error at our expense. They need to do their job and issue the correct passport the first time.

      • TS

        @James, et al

        As discussed here previously, the passport can be merely used as a second ID when needed and never for traveling; thus no need for “covered” text. It is believed you need to show the propensity to travel overseas to trigger a revocation, if “covered”, and then a new passport should be issued with the text.

  26. JP

    St. Croix US Virgin Island
    Has anybody been to St.croix? We have been to St Thomas in 2012 and there wasn’t any issues except my husband got pulled aside when we left st. Thomas to fly home. He showed them the papers from the PO office and eveything was fine. I know that St.croix is another US territory so it shouldn’t be a problem but wanted to check before i buy tickets. Thank you

  27. CB

    F the Government and their endorsements. The endorsement is unconstitutional. Trumps passport would not have enough space for all the endorsement he should have with that being one of them.

    The Government and the Police ALL have their own court that caters to them and lets them get away with murder. The recent article showing that California police officers involved in sexual offences both internet and minors physically yet get moved down to some misdemeanor just so they can keep their job and guns. TALK ABOUT A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE!!!!

    In cases of ICP and other minor infractions, I say we should all disavow all charges. They can’t treat us differently than the treat themselves. If your passport does not have endorsement, travel however you want (obviously don’t commit any new crimes) and don’t notify anyone.

    No other offenders have to notify anyone except us. If you were an ICP offender, I guarantee you did not get due process. Your lawyer also sold you out. I never even got to see the evidence or even question the search warrant which was loaded with lies. You see the police like to use the word “might” do this or that when the reality is probably not as is shown in research on the subject. Virtually all ICP offences are committed by people suffering from stress, anxiety, and depression and rarely make the jump to physical.

    Also, all the ICP images are probably supplied by the Government via the file sharing programs like Limewire, Shareza, etc. They know it is there and if it is so bad, then why don’t they do anything. You can’t get on Google, Bing, or others because search will not return anything. It is a simple search fix. They do not do anything because how else can they justify their budgets and catch the “low hanging fruit” or LCD (lowest common denominator)?

    It is a trap. Who do you think is the largest user of such programs? Answer: Kids thru young adults. So go on there and type in “pthc” and watch what comes up. Do not download any, but you will see what is there and then ask law enforcement why they do not fix it. You will not get the answer you think since they have no intention of fixing it.

    Food for thought: If it is so damaging to the viewer, why do all these investigators sit around viewing this stuff all day, they wanted that job, they are not there against their will. Are they not just as guilty?

    Who says you can’t look into the darkness? If it is free, how can you be feeding the demand? If you go to the Holocaust Museum are you not just as guilty also? I am sure they were abused.

    Enough of the “Thought Crime” BS that is America. Sorry, I moved off topic.

  28. Chris

    I am hoping to get some clear information about a cruise I am attempting to take. It is in the western Mediterranean on Princess Cruises with stops in the Bahamas, Falmouth Jamaica, Grand Cayman, and Cozumel. I am wondering if I will run into trouble trying to leave the ship in any of these places. Also, if there is a problem, is it solved by my simply staying on the ship? Will I run into any problems once returning to the US also? The people that I am going with do not know about my registration and I am hoping to keep it that way.
    Thank you in advance for any help you may offer me.

    • David

      (@ Chris: I think you mean “the Caribbean”, not “the Mediterranean” – Bahamas, Jamaica, etc. are Caribbean destinations.).
      Enjoy your cruise! The Caribbean is beautiful!

    • OCGUY88

      I went on this same cruise last year out of Fort Lauderdale – 7-Day Western Caribbean. No trouble leaving the ship at all those ports, so have fun! You will most likely be stopped and pulled aside going through customs coming off the ship at Fort Lauderdale. Expect anywhere from 10-30 minute delay.

  29. Harry

    FYI, I was in contact with FW Canada immigration lawyer, he said “Former foreign sex offenders with 10 or more years clean and have been removed from the registry for 5 years or more can obtain a entry permit into Canada”. I am have not confirmed it, yet.

    • M C

      @Harry,. I don’t know about the five years off the registry rule but I did talk to an attorney about this once years ago before IML. I was told that there are two options.

      1. You can have a Canadian immigration attorney write a legal opinion letter about your eligibilty status based on Canadian immigration law provided that you would be admissible under their guidelines for time passed from conviction and severity of your offense. It’s generally used to equate your offense to the lowest possible equivalent in Canada as opposed to the highest which is what immigration officers normally use. Apparently this carries some weight and can get you in under a lesser crime. Obviously the attorney costs money and entry is not guaranteed but the idea is to claim you are deemed rehabilitated.

      2. You can apply for rehabilitation. The fee is expensive and it’s best to have help from an attorney to improve your chances of approval. For most it’s significantly more expensive than #1. Approval also takes much longer than #1 so if you need to go with the next year you will need to use #1.

    • MathewLL

      Does Canada know how long someone has been off the registry? I have a misdemeanor conviction from June 2011. In about 18 months I am off the registry in Washington. Hope I don’t have to wait another five years before I can cross the boarder.

      Three years after the conviction I hired Canadians Immigration lawyers to prepare my paperwork, I drove to the boarder with my forms, FBI report, letters of reference, etc.. After sitting at the boarder for a couple of hours, the paperwork was handed back to me and I was sent back to the US. Nothing was said to as why or anything. I figured the lawyers knew what was going to happen, but they talk a good talk. It was a waste of a couple of grand in green backs. I might try it again in 18 months once I know for certain I have been removed. Of course a lot can change between now and then.

      • M C

        @MatthewLL, for Canada it doesn’t matter the conviction level in the USA. The Canadians look at the offense itself and it is compared with the worst possible Canadian equivalent. So in Canada your offense is probably viewed as Indictable which is equivalent to a felony even if it is a misdemeanor offense level here. Next, they look at the maximum penalty for that offense. If the prison term for that is longer than 10 years you can not be deemed rehabilitated and are always inadmissible unless you apply and are approved as rehabilitated (exception: Canadian immigration lawyer may be able to convince immigration through a legal opinion letter that a lesser offense should apply and that you should be deemed rehabilitated. There is no guarantee this will always work and the immigration officer gets to make this final determination.). You can instead apply for rehabilitation however five years after the imposed sentence (5 yr after probation ends). The fee for this application is CDN$1,000. There is no guarantee of approval however alot of things play into this and it’s a good idea to use a Canadian immigration attorney to apply. Please visit this link, it explains all of this.

      • trythis

        Once you are off the registry in WA, legally change your name; then you will never have any issue. Worked for me. If you dont change your name, you will always be in their system. Make sure to get a new US passport as it will have no reference to your original name in it.

  30. Sam

    Would be helpful to have a template that we can all send to our state senators and house members and the president, your state ACLU to explain our situation on the international travel ban even after a plea or sentence that was completed years ago. This Bill needs to be narrowed down to Human trafficking cases or sexual tourism cases. 99% of the registrants on the travel ban have nothing at all to do with the criminal behavior they are being accused of. And if we are going to be put on a list and denied entry why would anyone even bother with the 21 day notification. Can someone on here pass along a template so we can be heard and it should make it a little easier to get our message to the proper channels, it is a start and we must be heard by the right people.

    • MathewLL

      I do not know why ACSOL or the ACLU has not continued fighting the international travel restraint issue. To require a 21 day hold on international travel, ignoring the issue of the passport stamp for the moment, is a retroactive restraint for past convictions. This has its own basis for argument. Why is this not happening now? Is there more going on than is being announced? Also, I frankly do not understand why there is not more court action on the passport stamp issue. The District court made a ruling and it does not appear that an appeal has occurred.

      As part of the argument, there are individuals who may have to register in one state, but not another, and so there is a disparity of who has to provide 21 days notice and who does not. It depends on where you live. For instance, if I move to Alaska, New Mexico, or Texas, I am not required to register by state law. I have to register in Washington where I presently live. There should be an equal protection argument here somewhere, to help chip away at the injustice.

      As for the legal battle, am I missing some action that is happening. I may be way off base on this, so feel free to tell me how uninformed I am.

      • Interested Party

        @MatthewLL, you bring up interesting and thought provoking ideas.

        The 2 organizations you mention have limited resources and make decisions based on their priorities.

        I am not associated with either one, and can not speak to their specific areas for their immediate future in terms of legal action.

        I suggest that if you are asking someone, or an organization, to spend their resources on a task that you are passionate about to keep in mind that their immediate goal may not align with your immediate goals.

        ACSOL and the ACLU have made significant progress for our cause. I do not always agree with the actions each takes in the order they take them. I do appreciate everything they do which benefits our cause.

        There are far too few organizations and or individuals willing to spend their resources on our cause.

        • MathewLL

          Yes, I fully understand my needs and desires do not fully align with everyone else’s, and that each RSO has different goals. Because of this I have spent the last six years or so as a pro se litigant filing suits in AK, ID, and Hawaii, taking my cases all the way to three state supreme courts. In all of the four cases (I lost in ID and won twice in HI), they dealt with statute interpretations and whether I was required to register in those states. Now I have certainty that AK, HI, TX, and NM are free states for me. My last case was a Supreme Court ruling in HI this past December.

          I am not sitting around and waiting for an organization to save me. I am fighting my own little fight against the system. Win or lose, it is something that makes me feel like I am doing something. Personally, I would like to see more pro se litigation, perhaps a small group of like minded people working collectively fighting a few common issues. It is better than waiting for others to save us.

          Taking the next step of filing a federal claim is a different level of difficulty and effort. It would be hard for one person to do that, especially someone who is fully employed. Perhaps I will once I retire in a five or so years, but the problem then is, I will be off the registry in Washington and lose standing to fight that fight. There will however be others and I will never be able to totally get away from this crap.

          I prefer to win and make good case law, but hell, if I lose it does not get any worse for me. It beats letting them piss all over me without fighting back. That damn weasel in the AK DPS office was the worst, lying and making wild claims. I loved kicking his butt twice, once in Superior Court and once in the state Supreme Court. He was so totally incompetent, which helped.

      • Don’t tread on me

        I am someone getting ready to travel out of the country. I gave my 21 day notice but worry I’ve missed something. I have to agree that it seems IML seems to have been lost in the shuffle. I will call Janice’s office and see what kind of funding for another IML challenge is needed or what the next step will be

        • Gralphr

          I’m about to travel out of country and they actually though I was moving overseas. I told them they were wrong, but wished it was true (which they laughed because they know the registry is nonsense). It was very easy, gave them general info such as plane, and proof of a passport (I brought a copy of the page with my picture) and I was quickly done and out of the building.

        • Don’t tread on me

          Yup they screwed me. Turned me around at the airport. Thousands of dollars and a 16 hour day in airports and planes. No vacation for slime like me I guess. I am beyond pissed

      • Muriel

        I have been thinking perhaps a case on disparate impact.
        Although some registrants are not in a protected class, I believe a certain large percentage are, i.e. cannot discriminate on race, age, etc.
        Perhaps that is a path forward.
        Just wondering.

      • Looking for Answers

        I would love to hear how you’ve done that. I’m always worried if we were to move to a certain state it might make our situation worse. Would they move my boyfriend to a higher level and then never take him off? Would things be more restrictive? I’m worried to find out and I don’t know how I would found out unless we’ve moved and passed the point of no return. His is a military conviction, and seems hard for states to interpret.

        • MathewLL

          Looking for Answers:

          I am truly sorry to hear about you and your family’s plight. There is no benefit as we all know to having the registry, but it will likely persist for a very long time. With that said, you must take charge of your situation and decide how you want to deal with it. Yes, the sad truth is that all states are different and some are better than others. We do not read a lot about that and hope not to. If the media found such a list, it could cause panic and a one-up scenario where states try to outdo each other with restrictions. My misdemeanor conviction is very broad and as it turns out not all states require me to register. That could change however over time.

          Your situation is unknown to me and I do not request details. Those are too personal. I would presume being a military conviction, it will be harder for you to find refuge than someone with a misdemeanor state conviction, for you are subject to federal law even within your state of residency. If you fail to re-register within your state, you can be charged with a federal crime. Your husband may still be under supervision, but you may still be able to move to a state that is better for you.

          You need to research other state laws and learn how they will affect you, and then move to the one that is best for you and your family. Not all states put you on the public web site, so find one of those where you might not be public. Washington State allows local police to determine whether you are on the web site and is very hard to fight that. Oregon has a more centralized standard and is governed statewide. I suggest you look at that. They do a personal assessment and determine whether you are on the web site or not. A friend of mine was designated a level I by WA State DOC when released but was made a level II by local police and thus public. He moved to Oregon and is now not on the public registry.

          Some states will let you off the register after a specific time or allow you to petition to get off. In Washington state duration is 10 years/15 years/life depending on state offenses. If it is not equivalent to a Class A felony then is either 10 or 15 years, better than most. Unfortunately for out-of-state offenses you must petition for release through the courts after 10 years being on a registry. Your plan may include moving to a state for immediate relief and then later to another state that is even better after several years. This is a long term thing.

          I understand your pain and know your husband is even feeling it worse. He is lucky to have you still with him. People make mistakes and need to be allowed to work their way back to a productive life. My family was what saved me, and I am so thankful for them. I hope you and your husband have similar support.

          So, where to start? Google state statutes for OR, WA, PA, OH, etc. Depending on the year of the conviction, some state law changes do not apply retroactively (like in PA and AK). It seems daunting, but it is in your best interest to educate yourself than to rely on others. Feel free to ask questions and participate in support groups. I also have a subscription to ($30/month) to allow me to do legal research. It has now become a hobby.

          I do wish you and your family well.

        • MathewLL

          Looking for Answers, you can reach me on WashingtonVoices @ gmail . com. I would be happy to chat with you. In rereading your posting, you indicated the states are having a hard time interpreting his offense.

      • HopingforHope

        @mathewLL- I am very intrigued by your pro se experience. In each case did you file in state court?

        • M C

          @Hopingforhope, He has an offense that doesn’t directly match other states laws so the short version is he has been able to argue it’s not registerable in those places so there’s a pretty strong argument there.

          Sometimes pro se is a good way to go though but you have to research alot of things including case law that you can cite to put a valid argument together. This is especially true when your circumstances are unique like his. Unfortunately the rulings he’s gotten so far in his favor don’t generally apply to most other RSOs.

          I was able to find the State Supreme Court rulings he’s been involved in on Google based on the information he’s presented on here about them.

      • M C

        @MatthewLL, at the time IML was originally challenged it was premature to challenge it. I think it’s not likely it would have changed anything by appealing it. I would like to see a new IML challenge at some point but I also want it to be successful. I’ve wondered the same thing though. Do we have enough now to do a new challenge against it? I don’t know the answer to this to be honest. I will donate a significant amount of money for such a challenge if I can be convinced it’s the right time, whoever is doing it has an argument I agree with and think would have a good chance of working and the jurisdiction is one which will provode benefit to me if it is successful.

        But, I really think we need to look into the green notice piece being against the Interpol rules and push back on that first. Some things might not need a court to resolve them but Interpol isn’t going to pay attention unless they get a high enough volume of complaints and even then still maybe not.

        • Don’t tread on me

          I am someone that was just denied entry onto an island off Honduras yesterday. I too would donate an significant amount of money towards a reasonably logical challenge to IML. This has got to stop

        • Notorious D.I.K.ennerly

          The CONCEIT was that it was a premature challenge, certainly one that Judge Phyllis Hamilton was willing to indulge. It was already unconstitutional on its face and there had already been victims before the law formalized administrative rules already in force for several years. I was a victim of this law BEFORE it became a real law and was one of the plaintiffs.

          I don’t think that the INTERPOL challenge should be the first point of attack. INTERPOL is a terrible organization that is at the very forefront of the hysterical fight against us. They don’t care if their stated policies seem to be at odds with the practices of INTERPOL. This is precisely what they want to be doing and all you have to do is to hear their spokespeople rant on-and-on about “pedophiles” to realize that they are not susceptible to reasoned arguments about human rights when the human rights being contemplated are ours.

          And INTERPOL isn’t even critical to the implementation of IML. It is only one of the methods for disseminating reports. The U.S. is perfectly capable of issuing these alerts without it.

          We need to tackle it in U.S. courts.

        • AA

          We need a form letter to send Interpol requesting information about notices sent on us. I would also like to see a form letter to send angel watch to see what information is being sent about us. I dont have the know how to do it.

        • M C

          @Notorious, I agree with you that this needs to be challenged in the US courts but in the interim I still think the notices should be challenged with Interpol. Nobody says its a good organization however they still have an obligation to follow their stated policy or change their stated policy. Even the UK recognizes that they can not send green notices out on every sex offender and they leave it open to challenge if you are green noticed (because of the Interpol policy on green notices) and they in fact don’t do this like the US does. If you go to the UK offender boards for example there are some offenders that have no problems getting into Mexico and some that do because UK is actually making an assessment. Here in the US, IML is treated as a bright-line rule to green notice any sex offender they want without taking everything into consideration.

          So in short, I believe we do need to push interpol about their rules but I do also think over the long run the courts here will need to address this.

        • M C

          @AA, When it comes to a form letter, the problem with this approach is that requests will be different depending on ones experience with an agency. There are sample letters online that can be used for these requests and I believe CBP has an online form for making requests as well. I suppose someone could try and put one together that encompasses most scenarios and then you just take out what you don’t need.

          Unfortunately, I don’t know what all to ask for so if I made one I’d probably have to see what information I’d get and then if didn’t get all that I wanted submit additional requests. Someone else here who has done this before might be better at making one that would cover these things.

    • Bill


      A letter template for a letter campaign is a great idea! The more we send, the more awareness we spread. Keep sending them letters is like spreading seeds out in the field. Some of them will grow into the change we need…

      • Sarah

        Is there an updated list anywhere that tells you where you can travel? The travel matrix is not accurate. It said that Barbados does not turn away SO’s and my husband was denied entry and put on the next flight home.

        • Bruce

          I’d also like to find an updated list. I went to Hong Kong in 2017 and 2018 and to Armenia twice in 2019 with little problems but would like to see if I can find another country to visit this year.

        • Axiom

          The Information Hub. unlock dot uk dot org
          This isn’t an American site but the site does give valuable CURRENT information about the travel experiences of British registrants. The UK has a similar scheme as the US with green notices and all. So the site talks about countries in Asia and other parts of the world that turn away British citizens.

        • M C

          @Axiom, it is and isn’t similar. They are at least doing a risk assessment per the Interpol rules. In fact it is clearly stated that “Notices should only be issued if there is a clear indication that a person intends to commit or is committing a serious offence.” Therefore if they do send a notice on you at the very least you can dispute their risk assessment in the future by showing such evidence in a court or elsewhere. That is not the case here in US. Here they will send a notice if you are a covered offender regardless of any actual risk you pose.

        • AJ


          Thanks for the coded URL. You have a typo in there, though. The proper order of those words is “unlock dot org dot uk”.

  31. Weary Registrant

    Hello everyone. Just wanted to relay an overview of travel experience going to Paris and back. Feb 2020

    I do have a new passport with the identifier included. I did give the 21 day notice.

    Flying out no issues leaving the US airport. Used my passport to check in and go through TSA.

    Arrived in Paris…went through customs…scanned my passport…officer did kind of a double take at whatever was on the screen….or maybe it was just my paranoia…but asked no questions…quickly stamped the passport and I was through. No issues at baggage claim….picked up bags…had a car waiting to be taken to the hotel. My wife and I had an awesome time in Paris…no issues…enjoyed many sites…hotel was fine.

    No issues leaving Paris…you have to go through 2 or 3 checks to get out…but it is for everyone….the coronavirus is a hot topic…and was asked at each turn if I had been to China in the last two weeks…only question asked. I had not.

    Upon arrival in Atlanta…where I was to get my connecting flight…went through customs…I was flagged of course….like has been reported by many….the officer…kept looking at my info on screen confused…asked if I had been arrested before…told her I had and when….she looked at other info….asked another officer to make sure she understood…said “don’t want to cause you any more delays if possible”….other officer looked at screen,…said yes…he is on the registry….said it showed my passport current and new…and I was good to go….

    She handed my passport back and said thank you for your patience…I thanked her for being respectful…she said we all have a past….glad you enjoyed your trip.

    I did not have to do anything else….picked up my bags and moved them to the connecting baggage area. No searches.

    I know it is stressful…believe me I felt it…but in the end had no issues.

    I do my research as to what countries are available to travel and enjoy vacations with my wife. I thank everyone on here and sites like this for sharing their experiences for making that a little easier and not spend a lot of money only to lose it and be shamed at the same time…..I am sorry for those who have gone through that experience.

    • Looking for Answers

      Wow! Sounds like those agents were acting in a very professional and empathetic manner. That’s so nice to hear!

      • steve

        I had a similar experience in Seattle. I was flagged but they knew I had a connection and blew off checking my bags. It all depends on the airport.

        • David

          Same for me when I returned home to LAX last October: Secondary, yes, but no baggage search or electronic devices search.

  32. Don't tread on me

    The end of a very long disappointing day. After acquiring a new for the first time passport, I began researching where to go for a well deserved vacation. After talking to Paul at rTag I settled on the tiny island of Roatan Honduras (special note: don’t try). 6.5 hour flight time. I was advised that Interpol had advised them I had been convicted of sexual assault and to deny me entry. After standing in the immigrations and customs line for an hour and half in sweltering heat, I was told I was not welcome in Honduras. I told them it was wrong as I had been convicted in 2012 for distribution of CP. they forensically mined and found 6 deleted possible underage girls. Being scared I took plea agreement. Because I was using file sharing software I caught the distribution charge. They didn’t want to listen. They placed myself and my girlfriend in a room and placed 2 heavily armed guards. After a few hours We were escorted out to a return flight to the states. US Customs were polite and understanding. He asked me several questions and opened my suitcase. I told him I had never made it out of the airport in Roatan. He stated that Honduras had just recently began turning away registrants. I barely made my connecting flight but finally made it home. A 16 hour ordeal. Be warned. Stay away from Honduras. ALL registrants are banned

    • Will Allen

      Very sorry to hear about this nonsense.

      Just remember that it is terrorists within Amerika who are doing this to you and your loved ones. Those terrorists live among you. You see them every day.

      EVERY SINGLE “PERSON” who supports Registries is a terrorist who cannot mind their own business or leave other families alone.

      Make the terrorists pay today. Not tomorrow. Don’t make sitting around chatting about where People Forced to Register can and can’t travel be your PRIMARY focus (but we certainly appreciate the information you’ve given here!!). No one should make just talking about the idiocy be the primary focus. Instead, make the terrorists pay real costs in actual reality. Wage war.

      • Don't tread on me

        You are right. Time to start intelligent guerilla warfare. I am beyond just pissed. King George has risen and it is our responsibility as patriots to put him back in his place. We started this country to escape this kind of BS. I know there is little to no way to connect with you without you divulging your identity. Just know I am out here and plan to beat these assholes at their own game. I am smarter than most of them. This is ridiculous and patently wrong.

        • Don't tread on me

          If I can organize even 5% of the 45,000 registrants in Michigan. That is an army of 2,250 soldiers. I think I know where to get the mailing addresses. I realize registrants live in fear but this is NOT ok. If you are a Michigan registrant, plan on being contacted to join a patriot army. I’m tired of being a victim. There is a long list of options. Most options are legal, the rest….

          – Courage is not the lack of fear. It is being afraid and doing it any way

    • M C

      @Dont tread on me, if you are willing, please do FOIA or other type of information requests to figure out exactly what was said about you as well as what assessments they did regarding risk that they used to determine that a green notice should be sent. After you do this you should complain directly to Interpol about the green notice being sent because they are not doing an assement but instead sending out the notice based on a statutory rule rather than an assessment. They are not supposed to send these without an actual assessment. Further, if anything is false you should also complain to Interpol about this. It is very clear to me that Interpol does not want green notices sent the way the US does it even if the US is part of it. The US is very hypocritical about green and red notices. When the Russians have broken Interpol rules to prevent travel of their citizens (albeit for different reasons) the US has cried foul. USA needs to follow the rules like everyone else.

    • Weary Registrant

      I am so sorry to hear of your experience….I know it was stressful and embarrassing and all of the other things for everyone involved.

      The whole thing is just far over the top and has no common sense to any of it. Just a blanket policy for everyone.

      Even after we do all of our research…we really don’t know if we are going to be allowed in until that moment of scanning the passport and letting the chips fall where they may. Very stressful and unwarranted.

  33. Warpath

    I am on a new quest. After being denied entry into an international country and sent back to the US I am now on the warpath. In the interest of not repeating past efforts, does anyone know where I can find statistics on how many previously convicted registrants have been convicted of child sex trafficking internationally? Do these stats even exist? Is this a dataset I will have to compile? I have a strong technology background and a fair amount of resources to throw at this project.

    I’m trying to figure out where to start. I am placing my personal wealth behind this and WILL ultimately make a difference. I am NOT taking this lying down

  34. MLinCA

    I’m pursuing working outside of the US and possibly not returning. Does anyone know a lawyer in the Los Angeles area that I can talk to about this and what affect IML would have on me?

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 will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • 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 *