ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: Nov 21 Recording Uploaded, Dec 19 – Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

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.

Austria
Belgium
Czech republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland

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

Forms

Publications

Older Posts

 

Join the discussion

  1. David

    @ SJ: But did you provide the required 21-day advance notice of international travel? No need to answer. (If you had done so, I doubt you would have been admitted to Mexico. Mexico would have received a “green notice” in advance of your arrival and you would have been refused entry.)

    • Finally Retired

      @ SJ – i wonder if they even need to get that 21-day notice of international travel to be able to send out the notifications to destination countries. it would seem from the recent “Angel” Watch privacy impact assessment document that they have a separate system, likely automated, of cross checking international flight manifestos for convicted sex offenders.

      According to the privacy impact doc, once there’s a match for an individual with a sex conviction they then do manual checks against gov databases and the public registries of conviction details to establish whether a notice should be sent out to destination countries,

      Therefore the 21-day notice may not even be necessary for them to know if a person with a sex conviction is flying out and whether a notice should be sent to destination countries (as I used to think).

      Which begs the question-why even have a law to require this 21-day notice of international travel? They don’t need these notices to know if a “sex offender” is booked to fly internationally… they have their own independent methods of finding this out.

      Seems to me anyways..

      Here’s the privacy doc –

      https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/privacy-pia-ice057-angelwatch-august2020.pdf

      • S J

        I think you guys think to much. Lol Is anyone here in IT. If said computers are not integrated into NCIC like Canada is with usa it is hard to get info on people unless your on a national registry that woukd be attached to your fbi (passport #). You have to realize there are millions of people and hundreds of countrys who all code there info differently.
        Seriously even states have hard time knowing what you have done in other states quickly with NCIC. I truly believe they flag your passport number. Either it is or its not. Besides Canada that is directly in our NCIC database.

        • Just_5150

          Being a retired programmer, I have some idea about how information is shared across agencies and the difficulties involved.

          My old passport was confiscated at the airport, but it is still valid for a few more years. I have never received a letter saying it is revoked. When I applied for it’s replacement, they sent a new one with a new number (and the notice).

          So now I have a choice in which passport # to use on paperwork. I keep forgetting to use the new one. The one that is flagged everywhere. “Sorry sir. I keep updating my information, but for some reason, those computers insist on using my old number”

          I have a trip to Africa next month. I always wonder if I will make it. Hopefully, I will be able to stay this time.

      • M C

        @Finally Retired, I thought it had already been well established on here that the 21 day notice wasn’t required to have travel notices sent to foreign countries and that they just pull the info off the plane manifests anyway. I suspect the main reason to have the requirement is that it is simpler to identify those individuals who they want to green notice and it decreases situations where someone on a manifest that should be given a green notice is not identified it not identified quickly enough to send a notice to the receiving country. Think of it this way. If you give a 21 day notice they can notify the receiving country before you even travel and/or cross check the manifest and notify. If you don’t give any notice of travel, they will still search through the manifest but may miss some people who are registrants and fail to notify when they would otherwise want to do so. It’s like self identifying as a sex offender planning to travel versus them finding you in a manifest as a traveler. Doing both likely captures nearly everyone who is a registrant trying to travel. There may also be registrants not reported properly in NCIC or in the national registry when they cross reference but who are giving 21 day notice. They also may want this rule simply because it’s another rule, another way to screw up and another way to punish you again for being out of compliance because you traveled without giving notice.

  2. S J

    @ M C
    I was unassigned. I never traveled internationally. I went through great lengths not to be on public websites at my own risk. (As i travel domestically for work) I figured besides opening up my mouth about my status the only other way I would get caught is by going in front of a judge. Keeping my mouth shut was easy and not landing in front of a judge after probation was done, was even easier!
    My girlfriend wants to go to ireland. Looking into how that will go for me. I am pumped i didn’t get hit up going into secondary coming back!

  3. Finally Retired

    @ MC, David, S J, JohnDoeUtah

    Actually my response addressed David’s suggestion that if “S J“ Had made the 21-day notification of international travel before going to Mexico that perhaps the Watch Center would’ve then have sent a green notice to Mexico and he wouldn’t have been able to enter Mexico. But As we know, the Watch Center doesn’t need the notice to know we’re traveling abroad and issue their notices if they so desire – they scan all the Internacional travel manifests for sex offenders as a matter of course.

    With regard to the marked passport issue…. As I mentioned in a previous post, my charge in Florida while on vacation was for an offense that is not covered in my home state of residence for registration purposes. Also, for federal tier purposes, it is a tier 1 that ended after 10 years with my clean record (actually one lawyer told me it’s not even a tier one, because lewd exhibition doesn’t fall in a federal tier. I’m skeptical of this though because a minor witnessed it.).

    I am, however, still listed in Florida since I was initially registered there after my conviction before heading back Maryland. Dubiously. Florida doesn’t remove registrants even after they leave the state. The address they list for me is an old address where I lived when I was sentenced. I have never updated My information because it is not a legal requirement per state nor federal law. Because I appear in Florida’s registry I’m also on the National, albeit with no updates in 24 years as I said … A sort of “revenge listing.”

    (Does the actual Florida SOR statute define a covered SO as someone who lives, works, studies or at least visits Florida? Is there legal authority per Florida law to keep one on after leaving? If they justify the registry as a public safety measure to protect Floridians, then what public safety purpose would it serve to list out of state people without any updates, who don’t have an ongoing connection to the state? But this is a detour…).

    Coming back to the issue of the marked passport …the IML says that the SO passport marking applies to “registers sex offenders.” IOW, you have to be a current registrant. Once you’re off the registry, this marking therefore doesn’t apply -and even secondary is no longer an issue upon returning from international travels since you’re not actively on a registry. And we have read reports from former registrants that that in fact is the case -there’s no secondary after removal.

    The question that I have is whether I am an actual “registrant” as far as SORNA and IML go, for the purpose of the passport marking. IOW, would I be considered a “registrant” just because Florida has not removed me from their registry.

    SORNA itself only requires registration on the basis of living, working, or studying in a jurisdiction. The SORNA guidance says that individuals are to register in the state of conviction initially even if they don’t have a connection to the state of conviction and will serve their sentence outside the state. But the guidance also makes clear that there’s no federal obligation to update registration details after a SO leaves the state of original conviction nor for states to keep them on their registries thereafter…

    And in fact… in the Nichols case involving a former registrant who left Kansas for the Philippines, Kansas tried to assert jurisdiction by claiming that the state remained “involved” per SORNA because they still listed Nichols on the Kansas Registry. But The Supreme Court seemed to mock that claim, saying that SORNA makes clear that “involved” means that the offender lives, works, or studies in a state.

    The Court wrote –

    “The Government resists this straightforward reading of the statutory text, arguing instead that once an offender registers in a jurisdiction, “that jurisdiction necessarily remains ‘involved pursuant to subsection (a),’ because the offender continues to appear on its registry as a current resident.” Brief for United States 24. But §16913(a) lists only three possibilities for an “involved” jurisdiction: “where the offender resides, where the offender is an employee, and where the offender is a student.” Notably absent is “where the offender appears on a registry.” We decline the Government’s invitation to add an extra clause to the text of §16913(a). As we long ago remarked in another context, “[w]hat the government asks is not a construction of a statute, but, in effect, an enlargement of it by the court, so that what was omitted, presumably by inadvertence, may be included within its scope. To supply omissions transcends the judicial function.” Iselin v. United States, 270 U. S. 245, 251 (1926). Just so here.”

    Thus, in light of these, would someone in my shoes who’s not registered anywhere but still appears on the registry of original jurisdiction out of vengeance, without updates in so many years, still be legally considered a “registrant” for SORNA IML purposes – even after the SORNA term of registration is over per one’s federal tier?

    I do wonder..

    • TS

      @Finally Ret’d

      The dreaded marking applies to those who are covered because of an offense involving a minor, not carte blanche across the board to every person who has to register (as it appears you wrote above) because the marking text specifically calls out a minor. If they used carte blanche blanket covering to everyone who is forced to register, then they’d be incorrectly labeling people forced to register and thus subject to a defamation, libel, slander, or false light claim.

      • Finally Retired

        @ TS

        Actually the passport marking doesn’t apply just on the basis of a sex conviction involving a minor.

        *** Please everyone let’s be sure of the things we write here..

        Section 8 of IML covers the “UNIQUE PASSPORT IDENTIFIERS FOR COVERED SEX OFFENDERS.” While the title suggests the identifiers apply to “covered sex offenders” as defined in the definition section of IML (and would be “offense based”), Section 8 has it’s own definition of “covered sex offender”, which is: “(1) the term `covered sex offender’ means an individual who–(A) is a sex offender, as defined in section 4(f) of the International Megan’s Law to Prevent Child Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes Through Advanced Notification of Traveling Sex Offenders; and (B) is currently required to register under the sex offender registration program of any jurisdiction;”

        In other words, the “branded passport” would apply to registrants currently required to register under the sex offender registration program of any jurisdiction who have a conviction against a minor.

        Therefore again I ask – am I currently required to register as a sex offender under the SOR program of Florida? To me the answer is clear -NO, because they have no jurisdiction over me in Maryland. Neithe Florida Law nor SORNA itself requires me to update the Florida registry nor am I subject to its numerous reporting requirements…

        My specific question is: am I a FLORIDA registrant for IML purposes, though I have no connection to that state nor required by any law to give updates.

        I think you all can guess my answer to that question..

        • M C

          @Finally Retired, while it may or may not have legal standing if challenged if you have registered at any time in Florida my understanding is the way it is being applied is that you have to register in their jurisdiction. You may not be required to update it in Florida but your still on it and that’s how they look at it. I do believe your legal interpretation of why it shouldn’t count may be used to successfilly challenge it if they mark your passport though.

        • TS

          @Finally retired

          I never said a conviction involving a minor was the only criteria but it is one of two criteria needing to be met for.the endorsement.

          More info here:

          https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/News/passports/passports-and-international-megans-law.html

          You can also find the answer to your question there through an email to the proper people.

          So, please, be sure what you write here because how you wrote it above implies it applies to everybody when it doesn’t. A covered person does not necessarily mean they’re going to receive the endorsement.

    • David

      @ Finally Retired: I too was convicted in Florida and moved to another State 20 years ago. To answer your questions: yes, Florida has an “eternal” SOR – they continue to list people after they have moved out-of-state and even continues to list people AFTER they have died. (It’s important that the public be notified of potential sex offending zombies buried in their neighborhoods.🙄) BUT… after 20 years, you can apply to have yourself removed from Florida’s SOR. ( I don’t know the details. You’d probably need to contact a Florida attorney.) Yes, Florida’s “eternal” SOR has been – and continues to be – challenged in the Courts. Again, I don’t have the details, but I believe a big case is currently making its way through the system. You may find more information at: https://www.floridaactioncommittee.org.
      Good luck! 👍

      • Finally Retired

        Yes, Thank you – I hired a Florida SO lawyer earlier this year. We’ll file the petition for removal just as soon as the Florida courts physically reopen; my lawyer strongly suggested that we wait until we’re able to make an in-person appearance before a judge. He has a better than 50/50 track record on these petitions.. Fingers crossed 🤞 for sure.

        @ M C I agree with you -they’re likely to see my name on the Florida registry and automatically order the endorsement on my passport. But … SCOTUS in the Nichols case basically said (and unanimously) that if the individual doesn’t live, work, or study in the state where he’s listed that the mere appearance of a person on a registry carries *zero* weight as far as SORNA is concerned. Right there in black and white, by the US Supreme Court.

        At least I won’t have to provide the 21-day travel notice since I’m long past my tier’s time of registration.

        Even if I succeed in my removal petition, I’ll still follow all this because much of it is so over the top.

        Thanks again all who commented! And TS – I may have misunderstood your earlier comment. No sweat.

        • M C

          @Finally Retired, you should probably follow this if you are not in a registry anywhere anyway because there’s always a good possibility some jurisdiction at the very least proposed some sort of retroactive application for your situation at some point.

        • TS

          @Finally Ret’d

          No worries. Best of luck with the filing you are attempting.

        • David

          @ Finally Retired: A disturbing note for your awareness: I believe the proposed new federal SORNA rules* (which are discussed on this website) might – if finalized – retroactively place you back on an SOR (a federal SOR). The proposed rules change* would require those convicted of some offenses to register four times per year for life.

          *This is a huge, overreaching, draconian expansion of Federal registration requirements. 😡

  4. CB

    Regarding travel overseas: We all know that changes are coming to Europe in 2022 with the ‘visa light’ and we don’t know how that will impact us. If there are other destinations that are more attractive to me – let’s say somewhere in Africa or Republic of Georgia, and therefore harder to get to, will I be able to travel there from the US? I have noticed that all flights to those more distant places require plane changes in Europe or other countries that could be problematic.
    How does it work when you aren’t exiting the airport and therefore customs, but are changing planes in a country that may not be as friendly? My point is that if EU countries become a problem, does that effectively shut off the rest of the world? I’m in the process of making very tentative plans for about a year from now when I can travel, but will still be on the registry. Thanks for any input or ideas.

    • Lake County

      The rule of thumb is to never have a landing in a country that you’re excluded from. Many here have said to never have a landing in Canada or UK. The manifest is always looked at for all arrivals and departures. Even if you don’t intend to leave the plane.

    • Mike G

      @CB

      I can share my personal experience from the past 3 years, which is therefore anecdotal, but maybe a little helpful.
      I have had no issues flying into or changing planes in any Schengen European country. The ones I recall changing planes in are Munich, Zurich, Frankfurt, Lisbon, Paris, Athens, Amsterdam and Rome. Non-Schengen countries where I have changed planes with no issue include Moscow and Istanbul.
      I also changed planes in London (Heathrow) with no trouble, though I don’t recommend it. First, I was on my way home, so I hoped if there was a problem they would have just made sure I caught my flight home. Second, I flew in on British Airways and flew out on British Airways so I never left the transfer area, and there was no passport scan. Had I needed to change terminals, I suspect things may have been less pleasant.
      Outside of Europe, I changed planes in Taipei with no issues, and I also changed planes in Toronto with no issues, which surprised the heck out of me after what I’ve heard about Canada. They scanned my passport, and still let me right through into the airport lobby where I could have walked out the door and caught a taxi downtown, with my 5 hour layover, but I didn’t press my luck. I still think they let my out by mistake, because my customs slip had a big X through it and my wife’s did not.
      I hope that the new Europe visa doesn’t screw things up. Some believe they will only deny the visa based on crimes committed in the EU, and I hope they are right.

  5. Finally Retired

    @ M C – that’s an unhappy thought, but you’re absolutely right. 😔

  6. NorReb

    I am not a world traveler, but in 2015 I made my first trip to Việt Nam. I’ve become friends with many Vietnamese because of my help with their English over the years. I flew on Asiana Air and changed planes in South Korea. I made it through 2015, 2016, 2017, and the trip over in 2018. When I was at the airport in Hà Nội at check in I was told I couldn’t board, I wasn’t allowed in Korea. I asked why and they couldn’t tell me. I went back and found another hostel to stay for a couple nights and went to the US Embassy there. They took my passport and since it was July 4th so they were closed, but told me to come back the next day. I started thinking about it and I really didn’t feel safe going back to my own embassy so I booked a flight in East China Airlines going to Taipei, Taiwan. Actually the airport was easier to get to the connecting flight. In Korea you had to rescan your passport and go through immigration. In Taiwan you just went through a scanner. I got back to LAX and went through the usual second interview then out of the airport.
    I am finally getting ready to retire. I have been planning on this for a while, I have some friends I’ve help with English for a long time and they started calling me father. They are all married now and have families, I am hoping to go and live with them. One of my sons has apartments behind his shop and I plan on living in one of the apartments. ANYWAY, I applied for my new passport last May and finally got notice that is has been approved. That is what I have been waiting for. Last November I made a trip to Washington DC to talk to a representative at the Vietnamese Embassy. I took several emails from friends I’ve helped, and also from my sons and explained what I did over 20 years ago. The representative was impressed with the emails and especially the ones from my sons, that said they would welcome me, help me, and take care of me when I am old. He told me to send my passport when I receive it and he will get the tourist stamp on it and send it back. He suggested to go in with a tourist visa then talk to a lawyer there to get a work or business visa. He even said that I have his phone number and if I have problems at the airport to call him and he will help me get through immigration. I plan to retire there, in a recent conversation he mentioned the National Committee was planning on voting and passing a retirement visa.
    My question I need to know is, what do I have to do to exit the US legally so I don’t fear coming back to visit and have problems when I get here.
    I also would like to know, what I have read is the registration is only within the US borders. IF you no longer have an address within the US you are no longer required to register. I need to stay a US citizen for the Social Security, but I will have no ties or address here in the US. I will have my Vietnamese address, so with that I will apply for a new US passport living there. I live in California now, I was convicted in Arizona, but I sent the email when I left AZ and have been registering each year in CA. Now that I will be receiving my passport I need to really start finding out answers on how to do this. Of course, I can’t do anything until the US is off the ban list for travel. Any help, suggestions would be appreciated, I am just someone that is trying to live the rest of my life in peace.

    • A.D.A.T.

      @ NorReb

      I commend you for your effort, persistence, and patience. As far as I have read in different articles and blogs ( for what they are worth ) , leaving the U.S. for another living destination is fairly simple. In California you tell them you will be moving outside the U.S. . They will verify your new residence ( I don’t know what that procedure is ) and then they will remove you from the state registry. If you return, you must notify them if staying longer than the prescribed period. Basically it seems like it is the same as moving within the U.S. .
      Of course the real question is, why would you ever return.
      We all must face the reality that we are, for the vast majority of us, unwanted citizens. You have been fortunate to find a welcoming place that you can live out your life as a valued person, instead of being thought of as a piece of garbage.
      I wish you all the peace that you have been robbed of the last 20 yrs. also, if you need a roommate…………….😎🙏🏼

  7. Finally Retired

    @David – I’m way past my registration period for my tier 1 offense per federal SORNA. I was sentenced in ‘96 and with My clean record my federal sorna period of registration ended in 2006.

    SORNA Tier 1 says registration is for 10 years with a clean record and 15 otherwise, tolled from date of sentencing. These are automatic timeouts.. no need to petition for this.

    Maryland, my home state, doesn’t consider my offense to be a covered offense as far as the state registry is concerned.

    Not even Mr Barr’s revisions can change that.

  8. daniel

    I am a level 3 SO. At the moment I am in the process of obtaining my second citizenship. I am hoping this will allow more freedom of travel. I have read that some countries collect fingerprints and run them through the US and international database.

    Iv always wanted to travel Japan. Its been a life long bucket list but I’m afraid of the rejection once my prints are scanned. My plan would be to travel to the second country. Then from that country travel to Japan. I would like to know are your prints just stored unless you mark “yes” on the criminal history portion or is it seen in real time.

    Has anyone had any travel experience with a second passport or entering Japan with a criminal record?

    • Mike G

      @daniel

      If you manage to get a passport from a country other than the US, and residents of that country are able to visit Japan without a VISA, you shouldn’t have any problem. I am confident that Japanese customs doesn’t do a fingerprint check on each of the tens of thousands of visitors they get every year. Should you want to live or work in Japan, the chance of them running your fingerprints is greater, but even then, doubtful, unless they had some reason to suspect you weren’t honest on your visa application.

      • daniel

        No any person that is traveling to Japan has their fingerprints scanned upon arrival. There is a lot of info about it and I even checked the immigration website. There system is linked to the US. Which is why I’m seeing if anyone would have any idea if it comes up in real time or the matches need to be requested.

        • Mike G

          @daniel

          You are right. I stand corrected (again). Apparently, Japan has been scanning visitor fingerprints for many years; just two fingers, from what I understand.

          So, at the risk of being wrong again (we’re supposed to learn from our mistakes, right?) let me speculate some more. There are more than 32 million visitors to Japan each year (or at least, were), so it seems unlikely that they electronically query the FBI fingerprint database in real time, 32 million times per year. Even in the US, they claim it takes 24 hours to get the result of digitally scanned fingerprints. Japan is technically quite advanced, so they can probably query their own fingerprint database in real time, but it seems unlikely that they would take it further than that unless they had some kind of suspicions.

          So, like you, I would like to hear from someone with recent experience. I lived in Japan for almost two years, but that was many years ago. If I can ever get off this damned registry, I plan to go back to Japan again, so I do have a vested interest in finding out for sure what chances I have.

          Thanks for staying on top of this.

      • daniel

        I couldn’t reply to your latest comment.

        But I appreciate it. Hopefully this second citizenship will help with travel. I read a article where they said the device used has access to the US criminal data base but I have no clue if it will appear in real time. We will see and once I finally start traveling with the second passport ill let everyone know.

  9. JohnDoeUtah

    “The character of the threat. Directive 2004/38/EC and the ECJ highlight three main characteristics of the threat: it must be sufficiently serious and genuine. According to Articles 27-2 and Article 33-2 of Directive 2004/38/EC, the personal conduct of the individual concerned must represent a present threat. The Directive prohibits previous criminal convictions being considered as grounds for expulsion measures unless there is a likelihood of reoffending. The seriousness of the threat is related to the affection of one of the fundamental interests of society. Even multiple convictions are not sufficient, in the absence of additional factors showing that the presence of the migrant constitutes a serious threat to public security.”

    https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:158:0077:0123:en:PDF

    So, if an EU country is going to expel you, they have to show that you are a “present” threat of re-offending, a prior conviction is not enough. You are allowed due process and the ability to appeal an adverse decision.

    • Concerned Registrant (the original)

      To clarify JohnDoeUtah,
      The document cited refers strictly to persons who are already Citizens and Residents of a member country in the European Union moving to another European Union member country. In other words, if an Italian citizen residing in Italy decided to move to the Netherlands. It does not refer to a person coming from the U.S., even if he/she has a passport from a European country. Citizenship first has to be established in the European Union. The requirements for a non-EU immigrant may be far more strict, or they might be much the same, depending upon the member country.

      • JohnDoeUtah

        Yes. But I think the same language is used when applying for an EU Blue Card, as an example. Its based on a present threat rationale.

  10. Steveo

    So I just had an officer in my rural county come by my house and claim he was glad that he found me home because otherwise he was going to put out a warrant for my arrest. Me and my family were headed to Europe in November, and so, I sent the same letter to the registering deputy in my Texas county that I have sent every time we have headed to Europe. The previous registering deputy had stated that there was nothing to be done, and I just said that since Texas is not a SORNA compliant state that I was sending it to cover myself at the federal level. I put in a phone call and My registering deputy called me back and stated that if I was gone anywhere for more than 7 days, I would have to de-register, and re-register when I came back. Is that true?

    • Will Allen (Registration Liberation Army)

      I do not know if that is true or not. But it is a bunch of criminal nonsense. I’ve definitely seen it said in various places, I believe even possibly in the latest proposed federal “rules”. But I haven’t researched it at all or thought that much about it. I’ll have to let other people address its accuracy for now.

      But regardless, this “tell us when you are gone” BS doesn’t even support the supposed intent (i.e. lies) of the Hit Lists in the first place. The supposed intent (i.e. lies) was that a person is listed so that people living (working, whatever) near there would know the person was there. So if I am Registered at my home, what reason or business would any “neighbor” have that I wasn’t there? Or the law enforcement criminals (LECs)? In what way would that affect their “safety”? While I’m gone, they can lower their home defenses, LOL??

      It’s f’ing nonsense. The real point of such nonsense is to help lazy, no-work LECs. That is the point. They need to know when you are around to know if they are able to harass you or not. That is the only point. They’ll lie that they “need” to know in case some crime happens, but only real morons think that. If they ever use the Hit Lists to try to help solve a crime, they are stupid. They need to stick to any available evidence and nothing else.

      I’ve been Registered for well over 2 decades and not one single time have any LECs tried to question me about any crime. Not once. Which is fine, because I’ll never speak to them anyway. Not even if I could help them solve a crime. Because of the Hit Lists.

      I’ve Registered more than one home address nearly always (employment locations also). I’m not going to be telling the criminal regimes when I am at one home versus any other. F them every day.

      These kinds of “rules”/”laws” are the perfect example why no PFR should ever allow “compliance checks”. I’m not going to allow big government to come around my property. Because F them every day.

      Sic Semper Tyrannis

      • Stephen H.

        I maintain that ANY requirement to give notice of travel or intent to travel, or ANY requirement to give information about destination or lodging goes way beyond any civil duty to register. This is clearly in the realm of supervision, and without any due process whatsoever.

        When it is argued that the registry is punishment, this should be the starting place for that contention.

      • Steveo

        I’ve been at this nearly three decades. Times are tough, everyone is struggling, and the Deputy guy showing up at the front door claiming he would have put out a warrant for my arrest made my poor wife cry. It fees like a kick in the teeth. We’re not going to be traveling. The thing is my court papers literally say that I could quit registering after 10 years probation, but the State did not honor their terms of the contract. The state of Texas LIED, and it’s on paper lying. It’s documented, and they still make me go through this mental torture year after year. Some day God will judge these self righteous people.

        • C

          My heart goes out to you and your family. As you seem to frequently travel to Europe, have you explored the possibility of staying there?

    • JohnDoeUtah

      Check your state law.

      It seems that states are already implementing the New Proposed SORNA rule even though it hasn’t been put into law yet. What do they know, that we don’t?

    • someone who cares

      SteveO ~ I am so sorry what you and your wife have endured. I don’t know anything about the laws in Texas, but I believe any such so called requirement about travel beyond 7 days (or any travel for that matter) is nothing but punishment, and I just can’t imagine that this can be true. Don’t you have a similar organization as ACSOL in Texas called “Texas Voices”. Would they be able to shed some light? So, the officer came by because you gave a notice of International Travel (that I think is absolutely a breach of freedom and completely unconstitutional), and you were supposed to de-register? So, had you not given the “required” notice, they would have not come by? By doing what they want you to do (whether it is required or not), you were made to feel like a criminal? What else do these criminals want??? Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Someone has to stop them from playing these cruel games that they get off on since they have nothing else in their lives that make them happy. Pathetic!

  11. Josh

    I was required to register for 10 years in MN. My registration period has since expired and I am not on supervision. My charge was dropped from a felony to a GM after completion of supervision. Does anyone know if countries will still restrict those not on a registry?

    • TS

      @Josh

      In theory, if you are not on the registry further, they you should be able to travel w/o issue. That’s how it has been explained to me and discussed here. So, go enjoy some overseas travel.

      • M C

        I’m not so sure about this. My situation is the same as Josh and according to what I understand people like us, if the offense was against a minor, may still have a green notice sent out. Even if not on a registry you still have a record in the NCIC regarding the crime. Technically, you are still subject to the federal registration though MN will not currently register you so you can’t do this nor are you able to give the 21 day notice. That doesn’t mean though that the check of your name on a passenger manifest won’t get you noticed such that you arrive in a destination country where you are turned back because of the notice. I have not tried since IML was implemented but for reasons unrelated to IML. I used to travel a lot pre IML and only ran into the secondary checks when arriving back to this country. I wish I knew more about whether or not such green notices get sent on people in this situation but I do not.

        • TS

          @M C

          That’s why I said in theory and not in practice. I don’t have the knowledge you write of here and wish it would be known as to what does happen for all impacted. My only suggestion is chase it not from FOIA (cost implications for the requester) but Privacy Act (IIRC as noted in this forum previously by @Janice comments) because it’s cost implications are much less. Maybe she (@Janice) could advise again on this or another here in this forum could.

        • A.D.A.T.

          I would think (hope 🙏🏼) that cooler, more intelligent heads would prevail as applying the green notice to things like internet misdemeanors and such, even if it is a minor related offense. Hell, most countries don’t even count what I was charged with as a serious crime (not diminishing the offense).
          Sure, they CAN do anything they want, but SHOULD they?

  12. David⚜️

    @ Josh, TS, and MC: There’s one easy way to find out: travel to a foreign country and, after you return to the United States, send a freedom of information act (FOIA) request to the U.S. Department of State and to U.S. Department of Justice and request any records that relate to you and your travel. Be prepared for a lengthy wait as it takes around 6 months for them to reply.
    (If you submit the FOIA request online, you will receive an automatic confirmation that your request has indeed been received.).
    Good luck!

    • M C

      @David,

      FYI, I did this once regarding being sent to secondary when returning to this country (prior to IML – around 2008 I think) and they sent me about 25 pages with about 90% of it blacked out. They do give you a reason for most of the blacked out stuff and for most of the items, the reason was “would reveal law enforcement processes or procedures”. About the only thing they actually allowed me to see was my name and the time, dates and flight numbers of my arrival back to this country. I learned nothing at all not even the reason why I was sent secondary (although I’m pretty sure we all know). There is a process to have some of the blacked out stuff reconsidered – and then you can also go to court if you think other stuff after reconsideration is still not revealed but then you’ve got to spend alot of time doing that. I will say this, that I did travel once after no longer being on the registry in MN and just prior to IML and I was NOT subjected to secondary. I’m not sure that would be the same with IML and the green notices though.

      • TS

        The carte blanche redaction (i.e. blacking out) of paperwork such as this can be removed through your need to know since it contains Privacy Act information (hence my statement on a PA request recently) on/about you so you can see what was redacted and why. Hiding behind the statement of “revealing LE process/procedures” is bunk. They know it.

        They can even take you into a secure room and show you screens of info even if you can’t take home printouts of it. There should be no level of clearance needed. If they’re making an assessment of you that precipitates a green (or any) notification being sent, you have the right to know because it may be unjust and incorrect. They may not want to do it, but that’s your information. If they’re doing shady stuff, e.g. surveilling you, which the redaction hides, then that should be questioned too if you’re doing nothing wrong. Question it all as far you can through all channels possible without having to travel.

      • David⚜️

        @ MC: Interesting. 🤔 In response to my FOIA request, they sent me about 60 pages and I do not recall any of it being redacted / blacked out. Much of it was duplicates and the vast majority were emails back and forth between various people at DOJ.

      • Bob

        Every wants to know what was done about IML after motion was denied 3 years ago.Any resent plan about it?

        • David⚜️

          @ Bob: As I recall, the first lawsuit was dismissed by the judge who said there was no harmed individual (because the law had just gone into effect and no one had actually traveled under it).
          If a registrant travels internationally and actually suffers some harm, there may be better “standing” to support a new lawsuit.

  13. MH

    Just wanted to let everyone know that I just got back from a 9 week trip to Tanzania. There was a discussion between 4 different Immigration officers for about 15 minutes but then they told me to continue on. I am not sure if it is because I am a woman, because it was almost midnight and the last flight until the next afternoon, or because I had an official letter form the Tanzanian Catholic Diocese that I would be working with.
    I did give my 21 day notice to my registrant officer. Tanzania did not search any of my baggage or check my COVID test or my immunizations (all were up to date). I got nothing but a warm friendly welcome from everyone I met as I traveled all over the country. I took 3 flights within the country from city to city as well as a couple of bus trips and many many car rides with my hosts. I registered on hotels & national parks I even met a few Catholic Abbots and the Bishop of the region. The only trouble I received was people asking me about the election. I traveled all the way from the east coast in Dar Es Salaam to the west on Lake Tanganyika and back again. About 2500 miles within the country.
    Upon my return, I had to go through Atlanta for customs. This is where I was expecting the biggest problems. I had brought my laptop and some external hard drives with me as well as my phone. It only took about 5 minutes for them to scan my passport, take my fingerprints (they do this with everyone), asked me about anything I bought and then sent me on my way. There was no searching of my baggage or electronics.
    I have been home for over two weeks and have not received a note from the State Department yet about my passport being revoked. I have the note on the main page but nothing on page 27.
    Just wanted to share this info with you all. If you would like more info we can talk further somewhere besides here if you are comfortable.

    • Bob

      First and last lawsuit was done many years ago.It was so many harm done after it to so many people when so many people were denied to enter country.It’s time to submit motion again to help people to allow them to travel.Please do it and make people be happy in this difficult time.

      • MH

        @Bob
        I am not sure what you mean?

        • Bob

          Where we are standing with fighting IML?

        • M C

          @Bob, I think we are waiting to find some ideal plaintiffs in order to have a good case. If we try and fight a law without having really good arguments we risk creating bad case law that solidifies IML making it much more difficult to get rid of or even chip away at it later. It needs to be challenged but not blindly.

      • TS

        @Bob

        Until travel injury is shown from IML, it’s going nowhere.

    • James I

      Dear MH

      Thank you for such a complete report. I think you are correct, maybe a male would have more trouble or difficulty…but regardless, even with you, it does sound as though the INTERPOL Notice sent out by the US Government did cause you to be pretty completely inspected before you were allowed in.

      You did everything right and kudos to you for what sounds like a wonderful trip…just almost magical as travel can be.

      Thanks again

      Best Wishes, James I

  14. Bob

    I think country or place have to make decisions to allow or not person to enter.IML made too many problems to a lot of people.What else have to be done to a person?

    • TS

      @Bob

      IML has to cause an injury to a registrant who is traveling. What is that injury? Could be any number of things, but just marking the passport does not seem to be an injury and is justified as seen.

      Personally, marking the passport in the back is the USG’s way, IMHO, of thumbing their noses and poking the person with fear knowing no one will go that far into the passport when overseas but letting them think they could. It really is the notices sent ahead of time that are the problem as discussed here previously.

      • JohnDoeUtah

        I agree. I think it hinges on an irrebuttable presumption issue. They send the notices because we are dangerous, yet the “evidence” (i.e., studies) shows that we generally are not. Also, I’d say 95% of us have never been convicted of sex trafficking or 18 U.S.C. 2423, which further calls IML into question.

        In fact 22 U.S.C. 212a makes anyone convicted of 18 U.S.C. 2423 ineligible for a passport. So, why does IML exist if its “targeted” audience can’t get a passport either way?

      • Mike G

        @TS, et all

        Well I sure felt injured. It was a three-week trip, including meeting my wife’s family, ground tours all over Thailand, with stops in Laos and Burma, and round-trip flight to Cambodia to Angor Wat. Mostly all paid for in advance, and couldn’t get travel insurance to refund any of it. Including air fare (we did at least get to see the inside of Bangkok airport) it was over $6000 lost.

        On the positive side, the stupid stamp in the back of my passport (I was one of the first to get one – actually it was a picture of the stamp in my passport that first showed up in all the blogs) has been absolutely a NON-issue! We have visited 31 countries since I got the stamp, and literally no one has looked at it. Many border crossing officers, hotel clerks, travel agents, cruise agents, tour guides, airline ticket agents, currency exchange officers, and even US customs agents have handled my passport and not one of them has seen the stamp in the back. That said, the situation could change at any time if Satan Watch starts pressuring other countries to look for the stamp. If I manage to get off the registry next year, the first thing I’ll do is apply for a new clean passport.

        • TS

          @Mike G

          Ouch! Sounds like a notice sent did the damage. Does it qualify as an injury? Maybe if the right person could craft the argument.

          From Cornell Law website:
          injury – An injury is a harm suffered by a person due to some act or omission done by another person, and can generally give rise to a civil tort claim or a criminal prosecution. (Do you have enough for a civil tort claim?)

          An injury or harm done is also an essential element of unintentional torts. In California for example, a negligent act or omission is a breach of the duty of care to “prevent harm to oneself or others.”

          Some other forms of injury recognized by the law include:

          A permanent injury is a type of personal injury of a nature that has a lasting, adverse effect on employment potential. An irreparable injury is a type of harm that cannot be cured or reversed by monetary compensation. One example is the pollution of a river.
          [Last updated in June of 2020 by the Wex Definitions Team] (https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/injury#:~:text=An injury is a harm,essential element of unintentional torts)

  15. David⚜️

    @ MH: I am happy to hear of your great Tanzania trip! Congrats! 👍

  16. Illinois Contact

    @Mike G Horrible experience. My wife and I are contemplating going to Asia but the possibility of being turned away and having to take the long flight back is terrifying. We flew to London years ago and were denied and had to fly right back across the ocean. Now, here’s my question for you and everyone. UK customs apparently have an online connection to the US registry and check all names. This was long before IML and 21-day notices so there was no other way they could have known I was arriving. My local police would not have notified British customs. What happened in Bangkok do you think? Were they hard wired to US or did they receive notice triggered by your 21-day registration?

    Now my state Illinois is not SORNA complaint and there is no way we can give 21-day notice, police won’t take it. So we just give local police three day’s notice of our planned “change of address” and then also tell them when we return. So, I’m thinking if the Asian countries (especially interested in Vietnam) base denials on 21-day notices, I may be ok.

    I have also read that foreign customs cross check flight manifests with the registry but that doesn’t seem practically feasible

    • M C

      @Illinois Contact, pre IML I went to London three different times and never had any issues getting in. I was still on the registry two of the times and the last one I was no longer on it but my conviction would have been otherwise considered “spent” according to their criteria for that. Therefore pre-IML I’m not totally sure you are right as to how they knew about it under your specific circumstances. I have not tried post IML. I will point out however that our government was engaged in green notices prior to IML and that IML formalized and expanded when they do the green notices so it’s entirely possible you were green noticed even pre-IML

    • Lake County

      Illinois Contact,

      “I have also read that foreign customs cross check flight manifests with the registry but that doesn’t seem practically feasible”. – Illinois Contact, it’s very feasible. The U.S. and many. if not most/all countries check the flight manifests of every outgoing and incoming flight. It’s just a simple computer program. They might not always check everyone before a flight, but they sure will before any flight lands. It only takes a second for any government computer program to search multiple data bases. And every country has access to the registry. But the main reason everyone checks all databases is because they are looking for people on No-Fly lists and/or possible terrorists. Checking for registrants too is just a bonus for border control agents.

    • Illinois Contact

      Still confused about possibility of getting into an Asian country like Vietnam. My offense was 15 years ago in Illinois, lifetime registration (by stature), CP possession so (anonymous) “child” (16 year old “victim” in indictment). Non-SORNA state so no 21-day notice, and therefore I assume no Satin or Green notice. I inform local police three days before leaving of “change of address” which they do nothing with. So, I can’d imagine how would customs in Vietnam know that a “sex offender” danger was arriving and hold me up. Anyone have actual experience with this?

      • TS

        Flight manifests are cross-checked as has been discussed here. So, even if IL does nothing, your flight manifest will show something possibly against NCIC, etc.

      • Interested Party

        The RTAG travel matrix indicates that registrants have been turned away from Vietnam. The travel matrix does not provide details of the individuals turned away.

        @Illinios Contact

        Your assumption on how Satan Watch works is flawed I believe. Even prior to the 21 day travel notice, Satan Watch was sending notices on people forced to register. They can easily access data from flight manifests and then cross check it with database on people forced to register.

        If I were in your shoes the question I would ask is can afford to be sent back emotionally, mentally or financially.

        Sorry to make it sound less promising then you were thinking. However, if you still choose to give it a try I hope my read on the information is completely wrong.

  17. Illinois Contact

    Right now, my state police are not checking any registrations. They’ve been closed since April because of Covid, and guess what, they’re hasn’t been any spike in sex offenses. Maybe the uselessness of the registry will become apparent and they’ll close down for good.

    • Mike G

      @Illinois Contact

      That would be great! But seldom has apparent uselessness overcome public emotion. I’ll bet if word got out on a news broadcast or front page story that the registry is “closed” there would be widespread public outrage, calls for police defunding, and numerous offers to come in and take over registry administration from the police.

      Bangkok: There were 4 immigration officers standing at the offramp of the plane we arrived on. They were holding a signboard with my name on it. I thought it was a welcoming committee set up by my wife’s family!

      After escorting us to their office, they handed me a copy of the letter they received from Satan Watch. I wish now that I had asked them for my own copy because I can’t remember exactly what said, but it was something to the effect that “We are informing you of the arrival of this person who has been convicted of sexual acts with a minor, and who therefore is likely a danger to children in your country.” The second page of the letter was an 8×10 poor quality (and definitely unflattering) mugshot of me from some website (wish I could remember which one) with a large-type caption “Dangerous Child Sex Predator”.

      Well, anyone who knew what I actually did would be hard pressed to classify it as a sexual act or even molestation, but I won’t vent on that here.

      Actually, the immigration officials were fairly friendly and understanding. My wife debated with them in Thai for over an hour, and phone calls were made to the US embassy, but unfortunately, it was a Friday evening, and there were no decision making officials available outside an emergency, and I was not considered an emergency. Eventually, they let my wife go to meet her family who were waiting in the lobby of the airport. Then they gave me boarding passes for my return flight to the US. The flight didn’t leave for a couple of hours, so they turned me loose to wander around the airport. I did get to look out the windows, and I ate a Whopper at the Burger King. There was an official at the gate to make sure I actually got on the flight.

      My wife could have stayed in Thailand, but of course the whole purpose of the trip was to show me around, and she had already been everywhere we planned to go. As a consolation prize, our kids arranged for us to stay at a hotel in L.A. for a couple of days, and then flew us to Hawaii for a last minute booking to a week-long cruise.

      • Will Allen

        What a damn nightmare.

        If people actually cared about one another, they’d do something to stop this kind of idiocy. Perhaps the best way to do it would be for a person to ask a target country in advance if they could visit on given dates? The country would then tell the person if they will be allowed or not. They would get a solid, legal “permission slip” (visa!) or not. Wouldn’t that be a lot easier, fair, and more humane? If the country says “no”, you just don’t go. Easy. Save everyone time and trouble.

        But nah, that would be too easy and make too much sense. So F that. And how could the U.S. do their security grandstanding and propaganda? Has to be more dramatic.

        BTW, I love your use of “Satan Watch”. I see that a couple of others here recently used the same. I think everyone should. Not just for fun. I think it really matters. Branding is extremely important. I don’t think the Hit Lists, Satan Watch, NOT-SMART, or anything related to the Hit Lists should ever be given any respect or legitimacy. Never, unless it is absolutely required (e.g. in lawsuits).

        The more people discuss the Hit Lists and its schemes using the terms and jargon of the criminal regimes, the more it makes it appear as if it is legitimate and sensible. People should never have lengthy discussions about what the Hit List “laws” require without denouncing and ridiculing them. They deserve complete contempt and disrespect.

        The criminal regimes have done a great job of branding “sex offender” and turning that into a weapon of war. That is why no one should ever use that term. People who do are brainless and/or enemies.

        • M C

          @Will Allen, I have contacted countries about these things and some do reply and some totally ignore contact attempts, but mostly they say that there isn’t a complete bar to travel for even these sex offenses (with some obvious exceptions that we’ve discussed on here plenty). So what I think it boils down to is the government here sending the green notice which at that time adds significant weight to the entry decision. In other words, the green notice serves as a notification that to them you are visiting to commit a crime or are likely to do so. That is effectively what a green notice is. According to interpol a green notice is: “To provide warning about a person’s criminal activities, where the person is considered to be a possible threat to public safety.” So if you are a foreign country and a green notice is sent on someone trying to enter based on this definition what would you think? As such, the foreign country is not able to determine exactly what they would do in your situation because absent the green notice you would be admitted without issue even if they completely knew about your offense. As I’ve stated before, I think that the green notices, in the manner sent by our government, is actually in violation of the agreed-upon Interpol rules simply because according to the rule, to send these notices requires an actual evaluation of the threat one poses to the public on an individualized risk assessment basis and not simply a blanket rule as is IML. I don’t think you can attack this angle from the courts in the United States though but rather you would have to make complaints directly to Interpol. Problem is, this country has too much influence with Interpol, so the organization is likely to ignore complaints about improper notices from our government.

    • Mike G

      P.S. They never even looked at my passport – it stayed in my pocket the whole time.

      • JohnDoeUtah

        And you had no interest in fighting being labeled a “dangerous child sex predator” without due process?

        It is one thing to restate a conviction.

        It is an all together different thing to state that a person is “likely” a danger currently, or a “dangerous…sex predator.”

        If there were a case to challenge IML this would be it.

        • Mike G

          @JDU

          If only I had obtained copies of that letter. At the time, I was in a state of shock. I had never even heard of someone being turned away, and I was sure my wife would talk them into letting us stay. We had spent 3 weeks in China just a few months before with no issue.

          Also, I’m not sure that I could directly tie my refused entry to IML. I had not given a 21-day notice because my registering office was not accepting them yet. The notice obviously came from Satan Watch. I know now that they were sending notices before IML was signed into law. I also know now that Philippines and Thailand were their favorite places to send notices to.

          If I had that letter, I may have a case against Satan Watch, but I don’t know if I could challenge IML.

    • MH

      @Illinois Contact
      I have had to go into my registrant’s office TWICE since COVID started. Both were in person. There were people in the admin area that were not even wearing masks until I went in to the back part where the offices were. The detective I report to was one of the ones not wearing a mask until I had to meet with him.

    • Brian

      @Illinois Contact, can you please email me? I would like to ask you about Illinois registry.
      brianb789@yahoo.com

      • Illinois Contact

        Suggest you visit website of Illinois Voices for Reform, the local version of ACSOL. Click on Get Involved/Join Our Mailing List. You can pose any questions and real experts will reply.

        http://www.ilvoices.org/

  18. Jim

    So reading these comments, I have questions. I live in Nevada. My “crime” wasn’t against a minor. It was my now ex-wife, who I “pantsed” but because I was in the military and she was screwing someone who was much higher rank than me, unknown by me at the time. So knowing this, I was charged under the UCMJ for attempted sexual contact. Not rape or anything else… Attempted to my wife…. But I digress and will get back to my issue. I just got a new passport and it didn’t have a marker. I also asked my department up in Carson City if there is a thing where I get off after 10 years and they said no.. So I don’t know if Nevada is or isn’t IML or not. Also, I didn’t get an answer about SORNA also. Basically, they didn’t tell me anything. So with all this as pretext, Will I also have the “SATAN Watch” people sending the places that I want to visit even though my “crime” wasn’t against a minor? What are the possibilities that I would be returned if I did try and get into, say England. My time in the brig was only for 73 days and it was during the summer of 2014(August was when I was let out). So I saw the thing about spent time. I did a little research and I think I need a little more time. But back to the main question. Will I be turned away if my issue wasn’t involving a minor? Thank you in advance. I wanna go travel eventually but am super sketched about leaving and what I need to do. If anyone has Nevada info, please feel free to reply and give me the skinny about travel and the sort… Thank you again!

    • JohnDoeUtah

      What UCMJ Article and what type of Courts Martial (General or Special)?

      • Jim

        @JohnDoeUtah I was charged under Article 80 at a special court martial.

        • JohnDoeUtah

          A Special Courts Martial is limited to a maximum of 1 year of confinement; thus, it is entered into NCIC as a misdemeanor.

          This makes you Tier I for starters 15 years (or 10 years).

          Since it didn’t involve a minor, no mark on passport. But, you “could” still get green noticed and be required to notify 21 days in advance in that 10-15 year period.

          However, it could still apply if your state is more strict than federal law and you stay on for life.

    • Interested Party

      @Jim
      There is a lot in your questions, and I will give you my two cents for what is worth as I am not a lawyer.

      Per the information you provided, your passport should not be marked specifically because your crime was not against a child.

      In terms of satan watch and notices … they send those out specifically focusing on crimes against minors, but they have at times made “mistakes”. So no guarantees about what they will or won’t do.

      In terms of entering the UK, even if you don’t have a marked passport the UK has direct access to the US crime databases and so it depends on how they will view your crime. The best advise I can think of is contact a UK consulate and/or try and get a visa.

      In terms of traveling … there is a lot of information about nations who accept any travelers, such as Schegen group in Europe.

      Having any type of criminal history makes traveling a bit dicey … nations reserve the right to refuse entry for any reason and criminal histories are often a quick reason.

      I do not have specific information about Nevada but since your crime is federal it complicated things as many states impose their own rules and/or outside rules which ever is more restrictive.

      • Jim

        Thank you all for your replies! They really help my piece of mind. I really want to see Europe but I also want to go back to Asia, as I spent a great deal of time in Japan(3 carriers). I hope that the Satan Watch folks don’t even give me a 2nd glance after seeing my stuff when it pops up on their screens. Again, thank you all for your replies.

    • Freedom Bound

      @Jim I too am in Nevada and I have a conviction concerning a minor. I went to Europe (Germany) and the police were waiting for me upon arrival. They took me to a room and did an interview and was surprised when I told them my conviction was 20 years old and I had been out, crime free for 13 years. They then allowed me into the country and said that I should be able to go on with my life. I gave the mandatory 21 day notice, but even when I did that, I was told to my face they didn’t think I was going to come back and put you in a state of “de-registration”. I told then I was coming back, which I did, but now I’m looking at going back when the borders open again to seek work since Americans can legally be there for up to six months in order to find work. I happen to work in IT, which is a part of STEM which is a plus concerning Germany.

  19. Finally Retired

    Re: Notice of international travel—according to a letter Janice wrote to the California DOJ (linked below), there’s no current SORNA requirement that registrants give their jurisdictions any notice of planned international travel. A travel notice obligation, however, may still exist at the state level so it’s important to check if your state requires this (California does not currently).

    But as a federal matter, there’s no international travel notice obligation for registrants currently in effect. According to Janice, the US AG hasn’t yet specifically imposed this travel notice requirement upon individual registrants by specifying “time and manner requirements” for registrants to report their international travel plans; SORNA generally requires the US AG to adopt “time and manner” requirements for complying with SORNA provisions before they can apply directly to registrants.

    Instead, the US DOJ has issued regulations applicable *to states* requiring states to adopt laws to require registrants to give notice of international travel plans, as a condition *for states* to be deemed SORNA compliant. But there’s no current *federal* obligation for registrants who reside in states with no international travel notice requirement to provide such notice to state registration authorities.

    Bottom line: you’re not required by federal law to give this notice. At least, until such time as the US AG makes it a *federal* obligation by defining “time and manner” requirements for registrants to provide their itinerary information when traveling abroad.

    Here’s her letter to the CA DOJ: https://all4consolaws.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Letter-to-Atty-Gen-CJIS-8102S-27-Oct-2020_000510.pdf

    • Mike G

      @Finally Retired

      What? Are you saying that IML doesn’t apply to California registrants? That RCs in California don’t have to give a 21 day notice before traveling internationally? That’s news to me!

      • Finally Retired

        @ Mike G – it was news to me too. California currently doesn’t have this foreign travel notice requirement in state law, and the federal IML travel notice provision doesn’t currently apply directly to individual registrants.

        I can only surmise that since IML was tucked into SORNA it too is subject to SORNA’s general requirement that the US AG first specify “time and manner” requirements for reporting international travel plans before the IML Notice provision is binding directly on individual registrants. The US AG has not as of yet, according to Janice, specified time and manner protocols for the reporting of foreign travel plans per IML, and therefore this travel notice requirement is not yet binding on individual registrants. From Janice’s letter to the California AG…

        It seems to me.

  20. Austin

    Are international travel notices sent for any registrant or just those that have convictions with a minor?

    • Looking for Answers

      Here in Riverside, CA the office demands that every registrant give at least 21 days notice of international travel by certified letter or in person, regardless of what they are registered for. Not sure what they do with the info… if it’s just some offenses that they send out? I suppose Interpol is notified but we haven’t gone anywhere but Europe (Shengen) and and the only issues my husband has had have been when he comes back to the US, he gets pulled aside into secondary for questioning. Sometimes it’s a search of his laptop/ phone but mostly it’s sit in the room with a bunch of other uncomfortable people for an hour or so until we’re right about to miss our connecting flight and then they say he’s good to go… strange!

  21. A.D.A.T.

    This comment is directed towards those of us that have CP possession convictions hanging over our heads. It is directed not as a resource to commit any offense, but as a resource for those looking to move on without the stigma of a single mistake made.

    I have been researching and found over 1/2 the countries in the world have no pornography laws. As such, many do not recognize the specific offense of child pornography as a crime. I have called up a few of the consulates of countries listed to get a slice of the whole pie as a way of determining immigration, retirement, and visitation policies. Surprisingly, many have little if any diplomatic relationship with the U.S., and as such do not recognize the U.S. judicial system. I was told by three different representatives that as long as a crime hasn’t been committed on their soil and I am not a fugitive from any country’s justice system, I am welcome to visit and apply for different visas.
    Obviously there are certain countries that are less than inviting from a residence standpoint. But still, it is nice to know that options are available to those looking for a level of emotional freedom that we will never again experience on our own soil. I am still working on moving to Spain ( Mediterranean area ), although the Pandemic has slowed this process.
    As long as you are not tied to the U.S. as I am not ( no family ) , the world is more of a welcoming place than most are aware of.

    I hope all of you have a nice safe holiday season. I know many of you are looking forward to 2021 as a year of freedom in many different ways.

    • David⚜️

      Good luck, A.D.A.T.!
      Stay virus-safe! 👍

    • pnwso

      A.D.A.T –

      Good info. Thanks. I’m interested in hearing more about your experience in Spain as I’ve had my eye on it for a while and would love to find a way to move there long term. In fact, just a few days ago priced tickets to Madrid for next fall when I would finally be able to travel. Good Luck.

  22. Travel Update

    Wanted to give a little good news for some of us out there. This may be an anomaly but…

    This month, I did my first international trip since coming off the registry earlier this year. I did not have to submit a 21-day advance notice of my travel. Had no issues getting to my final destination in eastern Europe. When I return home, showed passport, was asked purpose of trip, and then told to have a good day and went on my way. This is the first time in about 3+ years I have not had to go through secondary (and I travel quite frequently).

    Now not sure if this was a COVID thing, a CBP that made his own decision, or something else. But I’m keeping my fingers crossed that since I am no longer required to register this is my new normal (and the normal for anyone else in a similar situation).

    • Finally Retired

      @

      Thanks, I’m hoping to be off the registry next year and not to have to worry about Secondary. Good luck to you sir. Enjoy your anonymity!

  23. ⭐⭐ ETIAS postponed 2022⭐⭐

    Implementation of ETIAS has been postponed until the end of 2022. 😊🤗👏👏👏.
    Heres a link:

    https://www.eureporter.co/frontpage/2020/04/08/etias-visa-waiver-postponed-until-2022/

    • JohnDoeUtah

      Is there any publications detailing that this will prevent visas to those with criminal convictions, even those decades old?

      • JohnDoeUtah

        I did find one site where they state that only convictions within the last 10 years will be subject to disclosure. Also, a serious crime is one where you “served” more than 3 years, not to be confused with the time you actually faced.

  24. M C

    @JohnDoeUtah,. I think I have seen the publication you are referring to. What I gather from everything I have seen it is that you are unlikely to be denied for pretty old stuff and that for the most part they are looking more into your activities when you have previously been in an EU country. In other words crimes that have specifically been committed there. Maybe if you have an offense where you actually engaged in sex tourism or trafficking it could be an issue – which is reasonable to me – but otherwise I don’t think it is likely to be an issue for most of us. Still, I am not 100% on this view so what really happens we will have to wait and see. There is also apparently a denial appeals process so it’s probably not a hard no like say travel to Canada, Mexico or the UK could be.

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 *

.