After we posted the story of one of our members who attempted to fly to the Caribbean only to be met with US Marshals at the airport who confiscated his passport, we received a lot of questions from people across the US, who are required to register.
Why have I not received a notification that my passport has been revoked? Should I travel? Am I going to get the branded passport even if my registration period ended and I’m no longer on the registry? Can I just get it over with and order a new passport with the brand in it? Is anything being done to challenge this?
The honest answer to most of the questions posed was “we don’t know”. The International Megan’s Law is a confusing piece of legislation, the definition of who is and who is not covered under certain sections is inconsistent. We received no (zero) response to the letters we sent to DHS, the passport office or any of the agencies we reached out to. And collecting anecdotal information from those who have traveled, those who have had their passports revoked (and ordered new ones), etc., has yielded even more confusion.
To try and make sense of some of this mess and offer our members something more than “we don’t know”, I did a deeper dive into IML this weekend.
First, IML is still relatively new, it was only signed into law a couple years ago, so there’s not a lot of information or judicial interpretation and even those who should know, are not fully apprised yet.Try asking your local Sheriff’s office a question about IML and gauge their response!
As it relates to people required to register as sex offenders, there are three important components that concern us:
(1) NOTICE OF TRAVEL – now you are required to report international travel 21 days in advance, (2) GREEN NOTICES – after you provide the Sheriff with notice of your intent to travel, they send that notice to the FDLE (note: this post is submitted on FAC – you can substitute your state’s law enforcement agency), they forward it to the US Marshals, they route it to their “Angel Watch” center, which sends a notification called a “green notice” to Interpol or directly to the immigration agency of the receiving country notifying them of your travel, and (3) BRANDED PASSPORTS – if you are “covered” by the law, your current passport will be revoked and you will have to order (and pay for) a new one that has the language, “The bearer was convicted of a sex offense against a minor, and is a covered sex offender pursuant to 22 United States Code Section 212b(c)(l).”
Surprisingly, not each of these three concerns might apply to everyone. Different sections of IML have different definitions of who it applies to. In some cases it is “offense based” – if you committed the offense, it applies to you. In other sections, it is “status based” – if you are registered as a sex offender, it applies to you.
The definitions section of IML contains the following definition, “Covered sex offender.–Except as otherwise provided, the term “covered sex offender” means an individual who is a sex offender by reason of having been convicted of a sex offense against a minor.” That would seem “offense based”.
However, under Section 5 (the “Green Notice” Section) it says, “In this section, the term “sex offender” means– (1) a sex offender under SORNA; or (2) a person required to register under the sex offender registration program of any jurisdiction or included in the National Sex Offender Registry. That would seem “status based”. So, according to (our) interpretation of IML, you are covered by the law if you have ever been convicted (including withhold of adjudication) of a qualifying offense, but under Section 5, if you are no longer required to register, they won’t send out green notices on you.
Section 6 of IML (the “Notice of Travel” section – “Requirement That Sex Offenders Provide International Travel Related Information To Sex Offender Registries”) says, “Whoever–(1) is required to register under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (42 U.S.C. 16901 et seq.)… As such, the notice provision appears to only apply to those who are required to register under SORNA (federal requirement and not merely another jurisdiction).
Finally, 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.
Why the multiple definitions? Who knows?!?!? Confusing? Certainly!!! But that’s what the law says.
Now the anecdotal part… There appears to be no rhyme or reason to the revocation/replacement process, though it does seem as though people who have recently reported international travel are the ones getting the notification. It’s as if the government is prioritizing people who have a greater likelihood of traveling as those they should revoke (for replacement) first.
Also, once you receive notification – your current passport becomes toilet paper. There’s no grace period. It’s instantly useless. It doesn’t matter (nor does the government care) if you have travel plans pending. You no longer have a valid passport and you can’t travel anywhere outside the country until you get it replaced with a branded one.
Which begs the question… if you know that you qualify under Section 8 for the “unique identifier” and want to be proactive about getting a branded passport (so you are not stuck with a suddenly revoked passport as you are about to travel), can you? It would seem the answer is NO.
Members have reached out to passport services without response. Members have had passports naturally expire since the implementation of IML and they have been renewed, in some cases, without the brand (where the brand would definitely be required). There is also no “special application” for a sex offender passport, nor is there anyplace to designate on the application that you are covered. It’s all just wait and see and hope you don’t get screwed by timing.
Finally – is anything being done to challenge IML? This is a question that should be tackled on the national level. At FAC, we’re super-focused on Florida requirements and those are keeping our hands full. IML impacts registrants in every state, so while FAC is completely on board with supporting a challenge, it’s not something we have the resources to take on ourselves.
We are in touch with the Alliance for Constitutional Sex Offense Laws and Janice Bellucci, who has tried a couple challenges (one was premature, other was dismissed), and would certainly not be shy about jumping back in the ring for a third. It might just be a matter of allowing the new law to “mature” a bit so the full extent of the harms can be appreciated before going back into court.
At the same time, Registrant Travel Action Group,is working a different approach. Paul Rigney’s organization is meeting with consulates and liaising with authorities from countries that are currently banning people required to register, in order to educate them. From their perspectives, they receive an urgent message from the US that this “Dangerous” person is coming – so they block them. With greater insight into how irrationally and irresponsibly these notifications are going out, RTAG is making headway in the direction of garnering flexibility from the receiving countries.
After diving deeper into IML, we have a little more insight into who is impacted and how it’s being implemented, but there are still way too many unknowns for anyone to travel anywhere outside the US without the comfort and certainty that they won’t be turned away when they land or not allowed to board the plane because their passport had been unknowingly revoked.
As for our member who wasn’t allowed to travel to the Caribbean because he arrived at the airport to three US Marshals waiting to collect his passport… after completing another application, paying another fee and paying an additional cost for expedited service so he wouldn’t have to interrupt his plans for too long, he did finally get his replacement passport with it’s shiny new branding!
If anyone has further insight, share your comments below. Please don’t ask additional questions as we don’t have answers to anything that was not covered above. You can direct your questions to the USMS National Sex Offender Targeting Center at 202-616-1600 or by email to DHS/ICE Angel Watch Center (AWC) at [email protected].
Here’s a potentially significant and helpful segment from a SCOTUS holding interpreting SORNA, from the Nichols case.
Might this holding snippet (below) resolve the issue of whether registrants who move out of states that fail to remove them from the registry, and are not required to register in their new State, nonetheless continue to be “Registrants” in for SORNA/IML purposes?
We have had questions here on this from people who have left Florida long ago, for example, and are not presently required to register in their new jurisdiction -and whether on the basis of Florida continuing to list them they might nonetheless be considered to still be “registrants” under SORNA. This holding snippet would appear to resolve that in favor of not falling under the category of “registrant” for the purpose of federal IML and the Notice of Travel provision.
“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.”
Question about 21-day notice of intended international travel req.
Did I understand correctly that this requirement applies only if you’re currently required under “federal” SORNA to register?
I have a ‘96 Florida offense against a minor that is tier 1 under federal Tiering. I was charged when I was in Florida on vacation, and when I returned to my state after sentencing I never had to register because the offense is not a covered offense in my home state.
Under federal guidelines, my registration requirement ended in 2010 since my probation ended in 2000 and with a clean record my registration time period ended after 10 Years post end of probation.
Since I satisfied my registration time under “federal” SORNA, would this mean that I don’t have to give the 21-day Notice?
From FRAC – “ Section 6 of IML (the “Notice of Travel” section – “Requirement That Sex Offenders Provide International Travel Related Information To Sex Offender Registries”) says, “Whoever–(1) is required to register under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (42 U.S.C. 16901 et seq.)… As such, the notice provision appears to only apply to those who are required to register under SORNA (federal requirement and not merely another jurisdiction).
It applies if you are in Florida and your offense was Federal OR State.
There is BOTH a Federal and a State requirement to give 21 days notice – Under Florida’s requirement, you would have to give notice, but if you no longer live in Florida, you would have to check the requirements of the state in which you live to see what they require.
Florida has no tiers and registration requirements don’t end. They are lifetime.
In my particular case, I’m not required to register in my home state – and therefore I’m under no obligation in my home state to give any notice of intent to travel internationally here. My specific question then is whether in my case where I’m no longer even subject to federal registration because I’m past my tier-specific “federal” SORNA registration requirement, I’m under any FEDERAL obligation to give notice of travel since the IML says that particular provision of giving notice of travel applies to individuals required under SORNA to register.
My understanding is that the federal requirement to register ends when the tier specific term has elapsed, even if Florida lists me without my having any connection whatsoever to that state.
From FRAC – “ Section 6 of IML (the “Notice of Travel” section – “Requirement That Sex Offenders Provide International Travel Related Information To Sex Offender Registries”) says, “Whoever–(1) is required to register under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (42 U.S.C. 16901 et seq.)… As such, the notice provision appears to only apply to those who are required to register under SORNA (federal requirement and not merely another jurisdiction).
I don’t live or study or work or have anything to do with Florida… but as we know they list everyone forever once charged there.
Thank you.
It would seem from a textual reading of SORNA that the 21-day notice requirement in particular doesn’t apply if you’re no longer federally required to register under Federal SORNA (due to the expiration of your term per your tier) and you don’t have a separate State obligation to notify the state of intended intl travel (e.g., bc the state is not SORNA compliant or because you’re not required to register with your state of residence).
In my case with Florida, I’m “listed” for life per their policy, and accordingly I’ll probably have a branded passport and green notices sent out because SORNA applies these two requirements on the basis of either a conviction EVER or the fact of being listed on a registry (see below SORNA text snippets).
My federal obligation to register (which is recognized as a separate duty from a state duty to register) ended 10 years after my sentencing on my federal Tier 1 offense – in 2008. But because my state’s Supreme Court held that under the state constitution citizens of the state have greater privacy rights than under the federal constitution the state would not participate in the federal SORNA, even when under federal law a person was required to register. The state opinion noted that as long as the person was in Maryland this federal obligation would not be enforced where there wasn’t a state duty to register. Amazing thing, really.
But perhaps a more accurate way to look at my being listed in florida that they haven’t “removed” me from the registry after initially listing me as SORNA requires – not that I’m an actual registrant there since I don’t have any connection to that state.
Federal SORNA, however, makes it explicit in the guidelines, that SORNA itself doesn’t require states to continue to list anyone no longer having a connection to the state, and certainly not to update registration information once the registrant leaves. This is a dubious Florida practice. Florida itself doesn’t require updating the registry details once someone leaves the state. I can only surmise that their policy is revenge, because it certainly is not required by federal SORNA nor does it serve any public safety purpose within Florida.
In my home state, the offense was never considered a covered sex crime and thus I’m not on the registry here.
Therefore if I were to approach my local registry shop to report my intl travel, I don’t know how they would react..
I’d appreciate a clarification on this -is it your understanding that after one completes the SORNA term of federal registration per one’s tier, this ”notice of international travel” would only be an issue/apply if there’s a state requirement to do so where one Lives and registers? Thank you.
FAC is not a law firm. We are neither licensed nor qualified to provide legal guidance. If you require clarification on any of the provisions of the International Megan’s Law, please consult with an attorney. Whatever lay information available through this forum should not relied upon in taking or not taking any action and if you are considering reporting or not reporting certain activity, at the risk of a felony conviction, it is certainly worthwhile getting a definitive answer you can rely on.
So we really don’t know, once someone’s off their state registry (and all state registries), whether there remains a Federal requirement for them to give notice of international travel. It all depends, and that is the question that may require an attorney, correct?
My specific question Was whether this specific FEDERAL Notice of travel requirement provision applies just to individuals required by FEDERAL SORNA to register. As we know, SORNA obligations apply separately from any State obligations. Once one’s SORNA term of registration expires due to the passage of time per one’s tier, then SORNA might no longer apply -not this particular Notice of Travel provision.
If one is not required at the State level to register, then presumably at that point there’d be no need to give notice of travel at the State level. But in theory if your registration term ends before the federal minimum standard for your tier level, you’d still owe the Feds this notice.
as written, it would certainly seem to not apply at the federal level if your federal registration term has elapsed per your tier.
As FAC stated above – Section 6 of IML (the “Notice of Travel” section – “Requirement That Sex Offenders Provide International Travel Related Information To Sex Offender Registries”) says, “Whoever–(1) is required to register under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (42 U.S.C. 16901 et seq.)… As such, the notice provision appears to only apply to those who are required to register under SORNA (federal requirement and not merely another jurisdiction).
That provision requires a person to determine legally whether they “would” be required to register in a SORNA-compliant state.
Not a big deal in Florida (which is SORNA-compliant), but confusing for former registrants in the 32 non-SORNA compliant states. Do THOSE people each have to hire their own lawyer to determine whether they, individually, are required to provide Federal notification?
This must be an FAQ.
I’d wholeheartedly agree with you Jacob. Unfortunately the SMART.GOV FAQs page is singularly unhelpful, and I haven’t seen anywhere online where this particular issue is addressed.
I also agree that the threshold issue in determining if this IML provision applies to individuals with sex crimes convictions is whether they’re presently required by SORNA to register. If the answer is no, then I’d think this notice of travel requirement would not apply at the federal level, at least according to a plain language reading of this provision in the IML.
If I were to notify my residence state of Maryland of my travel plans, where my offense is not a covered offense, I’m afraid they might tell me to file the notice through Florida, which after all is where I’m listed because they never remove once listed. I’d be afraid that Florida would then update my listing with my current Maryland address..
In which case I’ll really have to decide if I’m willing to chance skipping this Notice step on the grounds that my Tier 1 term of federal registration has elapsed and this particular SORNA provision doesn’t apply to me as SORNA reads (the penalty provision for noncompliance is based on being required by SORNA to register).
According to the comments in this thread, my problem is unusual. My SOAR officer has never asked me for a detailed itinerary, only for the name of the initial destination country. For the last two years, this has been a country in Europe. After I land, I travel to other countries, also in Europe.
Now I have learned on this site that we are supposed to supply a detailed itinerary. According to the SMART.gov website (https://smart.gov/international_travel.htm) the required information is as follows:
Destination(s):
• Dates/places of departure, arrival and return (if applicable), including the name of the city/town that is the point of departure from each country
• Means of travel (air, train, ship)
• Itinerary details (when available), including the name of the airport/train station/port, the flight/train/ship number, the time of departure, the time of arrival and information about any intermediate stops
So it looks like what’s OK with the local SOAR unit might be a violation with the US Marshalls. My question is: can I get in trouble for landing in my SOAR-approved destination country and then flying to other ones that are not listed, because my SOAR cops have not requested it?
And here’s another fear: Is it possible that the destination country might notify the US when I land? If so, would I then be in trouble, even though the local cops cleared my “itinerary,” just because that city/country was not listed?
Here’s a question about the IML, when the interpol sends out notices to foreign destinations about a traveler being identified a registrant and having criminal conviction involving children, is there a US Interpol and International Interpol?, if so is the US interpol the one sending out the notices and does it seem that the US government is acting unilaterally with the angel watch operation?
Interpol is separate from the Angel Watch Center of the Department of Homeland Security (which is on the US end)
Can someone help explain Amendment 11 in regards to the 3rd part which involves repealing the Savings Clause. The Savings Clause prohibits retroactively applying the amendment of a criminal statute to sentencing for a crime committed before the change, and clarify that repealing a criminal statute would not necessarily affect the prosecution of that crime committed previously. I have read quite a bit on this & am still confused due to the wording.
I have been told that, where sentencing guidelines have been reduced by the legislature, Amendment 11 allows those changes to apply retroactively.
I recently submitted a comment that stated I possessed a u.s. passport without the designation. I reapplied for a new passport even though I had 10 years left on my current passport Thinking that they would automatically print the designation on my new passport. I received the new passport 3 weeks ago and it did not have the designation. Today I filled out form DS5504 that is normally use to correct an error on the passport. I sent this form back to the passport service center along with a new photo and my new passport and a letter stating that I am a citizen who is required to register and would like for them to correct my passport and send me a new one with the designation. I will make another comment if and when I receive further information. I have already written to ice and the Department of State via email and have received no response for 3 weeks.
Please update us on this. I have considered this option but I have been hesitant to do so.
I provided this breakdown regarding the passport identifier on a previous post, and I will provide it here as well. As noted by FAC in this post, the appropriate definition for a “covered sex offender” as it applies to the passport identifier is right there in black and white in Section 8 of the IML:
‘‘(c) DEFINED TERMS.—In this section—
‘‘(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;
Let’s start with the identifier: “The bearer was convicted of a sex offense against a minor, and is a covered sex offender pursuant to 22 United States Code Section 212b(c)(l).”
Ok. So 22 United States Code Section 212b(c)(l) is the basis of who should get the marker.
Note: 22 United States Code Section 212b(c)(l) = Section 8 of the IML as described above.
So I’m just going to restate it again below (just to show it is the same), but from 22 U.S. Code 212b(c):
22 U.S. Code § 212b(c) Defined terms In this section—
(1) the term “covered sex offender” means an individual who—
(A) is a sex offender, as defined in section 21503(f) of title 34; and
(B) is currently required to register under the sex offender registration program of any jurisdiction;
Clause A defines who gets it based on their crime.
Clause B defines who gets it based on if the currently are required to register.
There is a vital qualifier between the two clauses: “AND” We’ll come back to that.
Both A & B have to be true for a PP to get a marker.
Let’s go back to Clause A.
A is defined by section 21503(f) of title 34;
Note: section 21503(f) of title 34 = section 4(f) of the International Megan’s Law
34 U.S. Code § 21503(f) Definition In this section, the term “sex offender” means—
(1) a covered sex offender; or
(2) an individual required to register under the sex offender registration program of any jurisdiction or included in the National Sex Offender Registry, on the basis of an offense against a minor.
What’s a covered sex offender in Clause 1 of 34 U.S. Code § 21503(f)?
Need go back to the IML.
Public Law 114–119 (IML)
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS
3) COVERED SEX OFFENDER.—Except as otherwise provided, the term ‘‘covered sex offender’’ means an individual who is a sex offender by reason of having been convicted of a sex offense against a minor.
(10) SEX OFFENSE AGAINST A MINOR.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘‘sex offense against a
minor’’ means a specified offense against a minor, as
defined in section 111 of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. 16911).
(B) OTHER OFFENSES.—The term ‘‘sex offense against
a minor’’ includes a sex offense described in section
111(5)(A) of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. 16911(5)(A)) that is a specified offense against a minor, as defined in paragraph (7)……
Which then takes you to AWA. If you continue following to AWA you get the list. It’s long and covers basically everything you can think of with regards to a sex crime and a minor.
Now go to Clause 2 of 34 U.S. Code § 21503(f) and the qualifier is OR between the two clauses.
Clause 2 of 34 U.S. Code § 21503(f)) is saying that a covered sex offender is someone who still has to register for a crime referenced in Clause 1 of 34 U.S. Code § 21503(f). The emphasis still remains on the crime being related to a minor.
We’ve identified who is covered in Clause A (the nature of the crime) of 22 U.S. Code § 212b(c).
Now we can go back to Clause B of 22 U.S. Code § 212b(c).
“(B) is currently required to register under the sex offender registration program of any jurisdiction;”
This basically means, from a plain reading, if you reside in Florida (for example) and you, right now, have to register in Florida due to residing in Florida, then Clause B applies to you.
What does “any jurisdiction” mean? This is where confusion can occur. This is how I understand it.
Again, jurisdiction as defined by the SORNA is: a state, Washington DC, a US territory, or Indian tribal land.
A person is only required to register in a jurisdiction if they reside, work, or go to school in that jurisdiction. A Florida registrant is not required to register in Ohio, for example, if he never goes to Ohio to reside, work, or attend school. So “any jurisdiction” is just a catch all phrase to make applicable the registration requirement wherever it exists, by law.
So, a person might be covered by Clause A, but may no longer be required to register in any jurisdiction that applies to that person’s situation. Remember, registration requirements and duration vary by state, and SORNA provides minimum guidelines for state registries to conform to in order to receive federal funding. Because they are different, and states define them, I see application of Clause B as tricky because someone could move to a new jurisdiction that would require them to register, where they no longer had to in the jurisdiction they are leaving.
Thus, in conclusion, from a plain reading, if you’re identified in Clause A (sex crime with a minor), but are not currently required to register under the sex offender registration program of any jurisdiction that applies to you (Clause B), an identifier should not be placed. That is because of the AND qualifier between the two clauses. But like I said, because states differ, clause B could apply to someone in the future if they change residence, work location, or schooling location.
As for notification of international travel (originating from the US), at least 21 days before departure, as per the IML and US Marshalls, the notification mechanism is in person notification to your registration jurisdiction. This is the only notification mechanism provided. It is always tied to the jurisdiction because it is the jurisdiction’s responsibility to forward the information to the federal authorities, per the law.
Note 1: Because registration is tied to jurisdiction, it ceases to be a requirement once a person has completely left that jurisdiction. For example, if a registrant relocated completely from Florida to Ohio and they’ve notified Florida prior to leaving as per the law, when they arrive in Ohio, their new reporting jurisdiction is Ohio.
Note 2: A rare scenario: If a person leaves the country all together to a different country (NOT any US jurisdiction as covered by SORNA), notifies their current jurisdiction of the international relocation 21 days prior to the travel as per the law, their registration obligations cease entirely until they return (if they return!). Why?
Who is the person going to report to given that all reporting is tied to in-person reporting in a US jurisdiction? In such a case, the international travel notification obligation doesn’t even apply anymore to that person as 1) there is no registration requirement as they do not reside/work/go to school in any applicable jurisdiction where the law applies (there is no one to report to!) 2) there is no reporting mechanism for travel that does not originate from the US in any law (remember, it is in-person notification in the jurisdiction). SORNA was updated in 2008 and the IML further solidifies the point that the goal of in-person travel notifications to jurisdiction authorities is to inform federal authorities “about sex offenders leaving domestic jurisdictions to go abroad…” – International Tracking of Sex Offenders Working Group White Paper, Dec 2010.
Sadly, yes, the only way to be completely rid of all of this headache (as of this post) is to no longer live in any US jurisdiction.
Convicted in NY. Completed their registry in 2015. So I move back there before my int’l travel, therefore I have nowhere an no one to report to, right?
According to the Marshals site I cannot report travel directly to them. I am not obligated to in NY, but also per the Marshals site, I can be prosecuted, see below and anyone feel free to help me understand this
more clearly.
Can I be arrested if I don’t report travel?
Although not all states require that you report international travel, you may be subject to federal prosecution if you fail to provide notice of international travel or file a false travel notice with your registry.
Can I personally submit an International Travel Form to the United States Marshals Service (USMS), National Sex Offender Targeting Center?
No. All International Travel Notices must be completed and submitted by your local sex offender registry.
You would report your travel to you county sheriff (or local registration office) where you live, regardless of your registration status, since federal law requires it, even if you are not required to register any more.
This is not true. The IML law says that you must currently be required to register under SORNA to be subject to prosecution for failure to provide this 21-day notice of intended travel. See above discussion from “Interested Party”.
Pay attention to the threads!
What if he’s no longer required to register, but in a non-SORNA-compliant state? Must he then determine whether he “would” be required to register under SORNA?
That is the question in THIS thread that is also raised by Interested Party in above thread.
“Covered sex offender” by definition under SORNA requires both a sex conviction AND that the individual be currently required to register under the Sex Offender Reg program of any jurisdiction (I.e., lives, works, studies). The latter condition is not met by your hypothetical so I would say in this example the two conditions aren’t met and thus the person would not be required to provide notice even if his term of registration according to his federal tier hasn’t elapsed.
However, the two conditions may possibly be met to trigger this Notification provision in IML if the individual moves to a state in which he would have to register and he still hasn’t met the minimum SORNA term of registration per his particular SORNA (Federal) tier.
That’s what SORNA says in my plain language reading of it.
Always best to check with an attorney with experience in this area though ..
I misspoke -meant to say that * under IML* covered sex offender means having a sex conviction plus being actively registered in any jurisdiction on the basis of living, studying, or working. Instead I said under SORNA at the top of my reply.
Who signed this into Law?
Obama.
Not that it would’t have become law anyway. The law passed with a veto-proof majority.
Please stop making excuses for politicians. The Democrats are just as bad a the republicans on sex offenders . We are living in tribal times Dems vs Reps but remember both tribes have kicked us out so please stop with the pandering both parties hate us.
Obama signed this into law. Here is an official link that discusses the history and effect if the law.
https://www.usmarshals.gov/megans-law-faqs.html
Obama was the president who signed it into law.
I am confused;
However, under Section 5 (the “Green Notice” Section) it says, “In this section, the term “sex offender” means– (1) a sex offender under SORNA; or (2) a person required to register under the sex offender registration program of any jurisdiction or included in the National Sex Offender Registry. That would seem “status based”. So, according to (our) interpretation of IML, you are covered by the law if you have ever been convicted (including withhold of adjudication) of a qualifying offense, but under Section 5, if you are no longer required to register, they won’t send out green notices on you.
The confusion is the last part. where it says if you are no longer required to register. Can anyone clarify this? To narrow the confusion I am no longer required to register in the original state, but am on another state’s registry. The other state (Tennessee) will not remove me from their registry. I have no offense there and haven’t lived there since 2001. So as far as I am concerned I am no longer required to register. But Tennessee says I am. I live in Connecticut.
BrianS
That would mean you are “a person required to register under the sex offender registration program of any jurisdiction.”
You would likely be subject to the sending of green notices.
So the US Government has adopted lifetime registration for ALL registrants for purposes of this law even though the Adam Walsh Act deems to require shorter periods of registration for many people?
Thank you for your response FAC. So yes it is confusing because I thought it was deemed as required to register where you live currently. I don’t have a requirement to register as far as the state of conviction goes. But certain states have there own set of rules and well decide that you have to register. I have asked this question on other groups and everyone seems to have different responses to the same question. So basically I think it is safe to say this law is about as clear as mud and nobody really understands it. Correct me if I am wrong in that hypothesis?
I haven’t received any notices as of yet. My passport expires next year and I am leery about travel myself at this point. I do travel for business and never had any problems until re-entry to the USA. This past year has not required as much travel on my part. Mostly because I have been trying to avoid it at all costs for as long as I can. Losing travel ability basically kills my business and families additional income.
Brians
Yes, the law is very unclear.
You are not prohibited from traveling. You just might get denied entry into certain countries.
Unless you get a very cool officer or its a fluke, you will always be pulled into secondary screening upon return to the States. It’s the same for all of us.
They can’t deny you entry into the country if you are a US citizen and if you did nothing wrong, the ordeal is just an annoying and embarrassing ritual that wastes a lot of time and means you can’t have someone waiting for you at the airport because you don’t know whether you’ll be out in minutes or hours after arriving.
Thanks again for the response. I don’t know if this is helpful to anyone or not. I did learn one thing in my traveling overseas. Basically, if you have any electronics and can live without them for a couple of days. Ship them home via FedEx or UPS. The times I was stopped I was held up for the longest time if I had a laptop, cell phone with a camera, Ipad etc. Doing so made it so much simpler and was usually done in about a half hour. Oh, and I would set my phone to forward my calls to a prepaid I had at home. Terrible to have to do stuff that makes you look suspicious but with any of the above items it is pretty much a guarantee that they will hold you 2-4 hours or more. Worked for me though because I had to ship equipment and material to the locations and then ship the rest back.
But yes the IML is nuts and thankful that there are those doing what they can to try and change it. Everyone has my full thanks and support and appreciation. I guess come the spring when I will need to travel, I will see what happens.
Or you may get arrested and federally prosecuted, for not reporting when you arrive home.
From The USMC site:
Can I be arrested if I don’t report travel?
Although not all states require that you report international travel, you may be subject to federal prosecution if you fail to provide notice of international travel or file a false travel notice with your registry.
Can I personally submit an International Travel Form to the United States Marshals Service (USMS), National Sex Offender Targeting Center?
No. All International Travel Notices must be completed and submitted by your local sex offender registry.
You are required to report international travel BEFORE you travel. That includes your itinerary, ports of travel (ex: airports), carrier (or if you are driving), where you will be staying outside the country, etc.
You ARE NOT required to report back in when you return. When you notify 21 days in advance, you are supposed to tell them when you will be back.
If you have a source for any requirement that says you must report when you arrive home, please cite it.
Every time I have had to travel within the US, as normal, I had to notify my local registering agency. (In my case, local sheriff) Each time I was told that I had to report IN-PERSON within 24 hours of my return, even when I had given specific dates, and arrival times when I was coming back home to Florida. I know this isn’t international travel, but does it bear any interest in what you are wanting to hear about, FAC?
If someone advised you to report BOTH before and after, you should supply us with their name and which county they work for so that we can contact their sheriff.
If you are not going to have another temp. or perm residency according to the law you don’t have to tell them you’re leaving, you could be gone for years just traveling state to state city to city and be within the law just as long as you don’t stay in the same place more than x hours, etc…
It was my understanding that if I was to be traveling outside of the state for more than 24 hours, that I had to notify my registering agent before I left the state. If this is in fact incorrect, please let me know, FAC, and if you need the information on the officer I deal with, I can provide this information. As long as it will remain anonymous. I don’t want to risk any backlash.
That is INCORRECT – if you will be traveling to another state and not establishing a permanent, temporary or transient residence (as defined by 3 or more days in the same place in the aggregate during the year), you DO NOT have to.
(1) If an officer told you this, please correct them.
(2) This has already been covered a few times on our site: https://floridaactioncommittee.org/fdle-responds-to-facs-request-for-clarification/
The registering agent in Osceola county (Anna) requires notification when you return from a trip. She also requires a complete detailed itinerary of your entire trip. Please correct this. Thank You
You do not have to report when you get back, But in Brian and my situation, we cannot report our travel prior as we have no registration requirement in the state we live(or will be living) in.
That may subject anyone in this situation to federal prosecution according to the USMS site.
Similar question to mine Brian. The problem that I see is that there is no one to register with. The federal agencies say you cannot do it direct with them. You have no state requirement so where would you register your international travel plans?
The risk is that the same FAQ sheet on the Marshals site states we can be subject to federal prosecution for failure to report.
This is one of the very confusing parts of the IML and a scenario where compliance might be impossible.
You say that Tennessee has you listed on its registry, but you live in Connecticut, and Connecticut does not require you to register. It sounds like the Tennessee listing is residual because you used to live there, and they don’t remove people from their registry when they leave the state.
Does Tennessee continue to require you to register there? If so and you are not registering, they could get you on an FTR. If not, then I do not think that you are “a person required to register under the sex offender registration program of any jurisdiction.”
My conclusion is therefore the opposite of what FAC said in response to you.
If I misunderstood your situation, then my conclusions are unfounded.
That’s a great point CR. That language is very unclear. If a state keeps you on their registry when you are living in another state that has deemed you completed with your registry time, what “requirement” is the registrant having to fulfill? Perhaps the requirement that was in the court documents upon a conviction that stated citizens will be registered in Florida for a lifetime? What exactly is a registration program? Does that encompass the lifetime lists that Florida brags about?
” Paul Rigney’s organization is meeting with consulates and liaising with authorities from countries that are currently banning people required to register, in order to educate them. ”
That is a great idea. I hope he can convince them otherwise and those countries can put a notice on their system for their agents to ignore the notices of the U.S government that is based on pure B.S. of every kind.
Hopefully he can convince Great Britain to do so as well.(I have friends there I’d like to visit some time.) Thanks Paul and RTAG.
I know he’s made great strides with Mexico. GB might be a tougher one to crack.
Some state’s restrictions are intended to retaliate against the US’ For example, the US won’t admit most with criminal records (not just limited to sex offenses), so Canada does the same.
GB is a tougher but because they already have a law in the books denying entry to U.S. felons of all types. It is not necessarily a sex offense issue. Ditto Canada, though I personally know of felons who have obtained temporary permits. And I am curious as to whether anybody has successfully obtained Canada Criminal Rehabilitation.
Jacob
can you elaborate a little more on what type of crime was able to receive a temp. permit to enter Canada?
thanks
DUI is automatically classified as a felony in Canada. So an individual I know with DUI was turned away by Canadian border guards. He went home, applied for an received a special exception, and returned to the border with that in hand. Later, I viewed a Canadian site specifying the basic requirements for U.S. felons to obtain a Temporary Residence Permit (good for up to three years’ travel but you must have a specific reason) or Canada Criminal Rehabilitation (affording the U.S. felon restoration of permanent travel rights, with a minimum requirement that at least five years have past since the end of court sanctions). This source did not specify that any particular type of felon would be automatically excluded. Finally, a NY times article a couple of years ago regarding felons and travel, further mentioned that U.S. felons can avoid confusion at the Canadian border by applying for and obtaining a “rehabilitation waiver” (again, SOs were neither specifically included nor excluded).
So that’s my best attempt at personally unravelling the Canada travel mystery!
I have seen some articles on this topic. The consensus from Canadian lawyers seemed to be that for folks like us, it would probably not be a good idea to try and do it at the border. Rather you should go through the more “formal process” of applying as that is typically how things work with more serious offenses. What I have seen and read seems to indicate that Canada does this in retaliation to Us treatment of Canadian citizens much like Brazil requires US citizens to obtain a visa but they waive visas for most other industrialized nations.
thanks,
yes I used to travel extensively for my job throughout the US and several times they wanted me to go into CA. but I knew (and my work knew) I couldn’t. i was in talks than with a company in CA> that specializes in getting US entry into CA. but for a SO i was given about a 15% chance and this was about 10 years ago and as we all know things have gotten worse. another factor it was going to cost about 2500 and rushed the process would take at least a year once all the paperwork needed is in their hands. i was just hoping you may have found out something recent.
as far as DUI i know someone that had a DUI like 20 years ago, moved to another state and 10 years later entered CA. with no issue. although had they been caught and CA. discovered this they would of been in big trouble in CA.
After 10 years you can petition then for entry. That was a few years ago: ot sure how its changed with all thats happened.
I was granted rehabilitation in 2014. The process took over a year.
That is valuable to know. And I see that FAC now lists a couple of Canada lawyers, if this is the sort of thing that requires one.
CC did you do it yourself or did you have someone help you? if someone helped you could you post or provide it to FAC and hopefully they can/will fwd. it to me.
also, what was your charge and was it in fl?
thanks
” I know he’s made great strides with Mexico. ”
That is awesome. It be great to visit Cancun and Acapulco again.
” GB might be a tougher one to crack. ”
tough, but not impossible. GB has shown at times that they don’t agree with the U.S. in some circumstances. I can’t remember the case ( I think it was a non sexual offense not sure) where the U.S. wanted to extradite someone back from the GB, and the GB read the case and gave the U.S. a flat out NO (not the first time either). Again I guess it depends, but I do hope he tries and succeeds.
Canada back tails the U.S. every time. It is like the annoying little brother that copies his big brother and wants to tag along all the time. Pathetic!.
The irony is that had most of us been convicted in the UK, we would have been off of their now non-public registry after 5 years.
This is Exactly what we need, to educate other countries of this US political agenda to gain votes. I would bet that most of these countries only turn us away because the US has actually requested it. My girlfriend lives In Colombia, and I was denied entry there at the end of August, but it was strange, because the Immigration staff was really trying to help me get in, but a phone called was made, and I spent the night in the airport guarded by security until my flight returned the next day. I would love to be a part of this to help promote us as human beings, people who love to travel and see new cultures. I would love to tell my story face to face to someone from a country banning us and see if I can help make a change. But the biggest problem, who do you contact from each country, who is in charge? who makes the decision? I will bet that not one of the countries that has banned us now, ever had a problem with Registered citizens or non registered citizens in their country before this new policy. Everything is overkill now, I am tired of being looked at like a freak, or a monster. I am tired of the fear of travel both coming and going. The US has put a noose around my neck, and now they are manipulating other beautiful countries to not allow us entry.
Ron – you can contact Paul at Registrant Travel Action Group and let him know you would like to become involved in the effort to make diplomatic relations (on behalf of our population) with the receiving countries.
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 1.972.638.0651