Comments on: ICE Program Turns Away Sex Offenders at Foreign Borders

By: obvious answers

obvious answers — Fri, 03 Apr 2026 08:01:07 +0000

In reply to Bo. you are correct but you must expect the government to follow its own laws.. if the government did that how many politicians wouldn't be able to travel because their Epstein island escapades or tax payer slush fund sex crime pay off?

By: Bo

Bo — Fri, 03 Apr 2026 01:13:05 +0000

Through the Angel Watch program, the U.S. government is actively shaping how foreign nations perceive its own citizens. It automatically sends advance warnings—often framed as alerts about “convicted child sex offenders”—for any registrant who plans to enter another country. These notices do not explain whether the offense was violent or nonviolent. There is no individualized risk assessment and no way to demonstrate rehabilitation. They simply mark the traveler as a presumptive threat and dangerouis.
Foreign border agents, understandably erring on the side of caution, often deny entry on the spot. Many registrants report being turned away at airports, detained for hours, permanently banned, or placed on foreign watchlists. Americans have been refused entry to Mexico, Canada, the Philippines, Japan, and parts of Europe — not because those countries independently assessed risk, but because the U.S. told them to be afraid. These consequences fall hardest on individuals whose offenses were minor, decades old, or committed as juveniles. This is not public safety. It is extraterritorial punishment.
No other democratic nation exports its registry in this way. Most don’t maintain public registries at all. And none presume that every person who ever committed a sexual offense — no matter how minor or how long ago — should be treated as a permanent threat to the world.
The United States is effectively outsourcing its harshest draconian domestic policies, encouraging other nations to adopt its assumptions, and stripping its own citizens of the ability to travel, work, or visit family abroad. There is no appeals process. No individualized review. No path to redemption. The U.S. is effectively telling other nations: trust our registry, not your own laws or risk assessments. This undermines foreign sovereignty and creates diplomatic friction.
The real crime is that this whole fiasco was created late one night after most Congressmen and women had gone home, and the obvious passage was more an act to go home than weight the Constitutional implications. New laws to protect children, no matter how invasive, are an easy sell. From that slight, the institutional budget was significantly increased with new funding for Angel Watch and its new mission. If the government believes someone poses a genuine, ongoing danger, it should make that case through due process — not through blanket notifications that function as global scarlet letters.
Protecting children is essential. But a system that treats every registrant as a predator, forever, is not protection. It is policy by stigma. And it is time for the U.S. to reconsider whether exporting that stigma to the rest of the world is worthy of a nation that claims to believe in justice, proportionality, and second chances.

By: obvious answers

obvious answers — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 02:08:01 +0000

This is in reply to the misinformation regards Angel Watch,TSA,USICS entering into country and marriage visas posted in comments below. This is all proven and verifiable information with evidence available as required. As a Registered Sex Offender (RSO) in the United States, if you marry a foreign national outside the U.S., the U.S. government—specifically USCIS—can and will block your spouse from immigrating to or entering America. They can do this using virtually any excuse, but in practice the denial often rests solely on your RSO status, particularly when the underlying conviction qualifies as a “specified offense against a minor” under the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act. USCIS exercises “sole and unreviewable discretion” to decide whether the petitioner poses “no risk” to the beneficiary. The burden of proof is extremely high, and the decision cannot be appealed or reviewed by any court.
I know some have “claimed otherwise” Show me this mystery attorney who claims there is a reliable path forward. Most are flat scammers and yes there are many attorneys who will scam you and tell you lies just to walk with your money and you only poorer and worse off . I possess the actual one-paragraph denial letter from USCIS that directly contradicts that claim.
They can and will deny the spouse’s petition, visa, or entry based primarily or entirely on the fact that the petitioner is an RSO with a qualifying conviction.
The USCIS denial letter explicitly states that the agency has unlimited authority in this matter and that the decision is unappealable and not reviewable by the courts.
I have all the supporting documentation and receipts as evidence and am prepared to provide them.
In their denial, USCIS claimed they were acting “to protect my wife,” asserting that she is not intelligent or capable enough to protect herself from me potentially committing a similar offense against her. This justification is absurd on its face: both my wife and I are over 50 years old, making it physically impossible for us to recreate the circumstances of the original case, which occurred more than thirty years ago when we were both minors in a consensual relationship with no force or coercion. Furthermore, my wife is the same age as me and serves as a high-ranking judge and law professor—someone eminently qualified to make her own decisions and protect herself.
If USCIS’s overriding justification in these cases is always “protecting the children,” their actions here are illogical and contradictory. They have deliberately separated our son from his mother, even though our son is fully permitted to remain in the United States with me (the RSO father). The only result has been the destruction of our family unit under the pretext of child protection.
Because of this, I was forced to leave the United States and pursue legal recognition of our marriage and family rights in the courts of a third-world country—which, ironically, provided more straightforward and practical justice than the U.S. system—in order for my wife, our son, and me to live together under one roof as a family.
If anyone knows a legitimate immigration attorney who has successfully handled a comparable Adam Walsh Act / RSO spousal immigration case and can demonstrate a realistic, evidence-based path to approval, I am genuinely open to hearing from them.

By: obvious answers

obvious answers — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 00:35:19 +0000

you do realize I am overseas and married. I did what you suggest while another member here did what I have told you now. you are incorrect. dont follow your advice. I followed your advice and it was the worst suggestion ever. 🙂

By: No Hope

No Hope — Tue, 31 Mar 2026 23:50:03 +0000

In reply to obvious answers. you are incorrect if you are married outside the U.S. you will have to wait the 6 months to a year for the visa to become a reality but they cannot legally deny you, not yet at least. i know several immigrations that will confirm that and if you really need that info all you have to do is ask F.A.C. for my e-mail and i will send you one attorney's info that has done no less than 4 registered marriage visa's successfully

By: obvious answers

obvious answers — Tue, 31 Mar 2026 23:08:51 +0000

Angel watch , another misnamed, bloated government scam for abuse ,money laundering that gives congressional cronies unlimited funds and money with no oversight and absolutely impossible to dismantle even if it’s crimes were exposed.And there are plenty…I’m not advocating violence or criminal activity—our government already commits enough of both for all of us. This is simply an observation.
Every day the media parades stories of individuals using vehicles, chemicals, explosives, or weapons to commit mass tragedies, branding them “terrorists” while the government dismisses them as mentally ill. Yet no one asks the obvious question: what drives ordinary people to such extremes?
The answer may lie in a profoundly hypocritical government that relentlessly forces insane laws, petty rules, and crushing regulations on the public—laws it openly ignores and never follows itself—while repeatedly getting caught in the most horrific crimes against its own citizens, from Epstein Island to countless other scandals.
Having witnessed America’s inequality and injustice up close, and having lived abroad to see its behavior overseas, it’s clear: if we genuinely wanted fewer terrorist acts, we should dismantle this American terrorist government first.
The entire ruling cabal is a pack of pompous, predatory elites who live like self-entitled royalty—modern Marie Antoinettes—enriching themselves at the expense of the American people and the world. They destroy families, crush lives, and push people to the brink, all while exempting themselves from every standard they impose.
You can only oppress people for so long. When everything is taken and nothing is left to lose, some inevitably snap. While I do not condone their violence, I do wish that when they do, they would target only the actual scumbags responsible for the widespread suffering.

By: obvious answers

obvious answers — Tue, 31 Mar 2026 22:44:43 +0000

In reply to No Hope. Uhm, actually it's exactly the opposite. If you get married outside the USA, your spouse has zero rights and they won't allow them entry. If you can somehow sneak your spouse into the USA and then file, they have some rights from being on American soil, and it becomes a battle of attrition where you can keep appealing forever. As long as your case is in appeals, they can stay, and eventually the corrupt machine that is the American government will often just let them stay.

By: obvious answers

obvious answers — Tue, 31 Mar 2026 22:35:23 +0000

In reply to Anonymous. it's a scam office like everything congress touches and ounce it's added to the bureaucracy it's impossible to remove.

By: No end

No end — Tue, 31 Mar 2026 17:23:34 +0000

In reply to TS. I "feel" so much safer now ( sarcasm)

By: TS

TS — Tue, 31 Mar 2026 16:50:56 +0000

Is this it for the article or is there more? I cannot see more if there is more due to a paywall.