An advocate in Switzerland contacted NARSOL with a suggestion: We should organize a sign-on letter to the State Department asking them to cease revoking the passports of registered citizens who met the Angel Watch criteria of needing a “special identifier” affixed to their passports.

As NARSOL has previously successfully organized two sign-on letters— one to Patch regarding “red-dot” Halloween maps and the other to state attorneys general regarding the American Law Institute’s (ALI) revised penal code for sexual offenses — we agreed to do this.

This is the letter sent.

Rachel M. Arndt, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Passport Services

Dear Ms. Arndt,

Our organizations represent the nearly one million Americans who register for sex offenses or they are organizations in sympathy with the plight of their fellow Americans. We are writing to you regarding the troubling number of cases of passport revocations affecting our members, their families, their employees and other dependents. We believe that there is a simple way to mitigate some of the harm these revocations have caused, and we urge you to consider doing so, as follows.

As you know, passports may be revoked for a number of reasons, but all of these reasons stem from the actions (or inactions, as in not paying federal income tax) of the individual passport holder. This is the first time that we are aware of that an entire class of U.S. citizens faces having a passport revoked through no specific action on their part, aside from having on their record a historic conviction, which may date back many decades.

Revocation is especially frightening for travelers overseas. Their passports may be the only proof of citizenship they possess. Revoking them places them in jeopardy in their host countries and, in our view, hinders the ability of the State Department to fulfill its primary mission of protecting all American citizens.

There is a ready solution. The language of the International Megan’s Law states that the State Department shall include a unique identifier in the passport of a covered individual but that it may revoke a passport without this identifier.

Therefore, we urge you to cease revoking the passports of these covered individuals. Passports are routinely amended, pages are added, and so on, without the need for revocation or the issuance of an entirely new passport. Adding or removing the unique identifier could be done in the same way with much less harm.

Thank you for your attention.

The National Association for Rational Sexual Offense Laws (NARSOL) – sponsor

<The names of all participating organizations followed.>

We mailed the letter by registered mail February 1, 2024, a Thursday. Tracking showed that it was given into the possession of someone in the State Dept. on Monday, February 5. As of today, February 19, there has been no response or acknowledgment from the State Dept.

The post State Dept. unnecessarily revokes registrants’ passports; NARSOL, others, ask them to stop first appeared on NARSOL.

By Kyle . . . We are witnessing a disturbing trend in America of punishing people after they have completed their official court-imposed sentence for an offense or even before any criminal charges have been filed and a person has been convicted of a crime.

In the arena of sex offenses, this manifests in several ways. Indefinite civil commitment-habeas corpus anyone? Registration beyond the term of the sentence. Registration results in numerous harms which clearly constitute “punishment”: serious housing restrictions; movement restrictions; domestic travel restrictions, making travel for business and pleasure a nightmare; employment challenges; and now, passport markings (A Scarlet Letter) because of the International Megan’s Law in conjunction with Angel Watch. This is not only “compelled speech” (as it is for registration in general) but restricts one’s ability to travel freely internationally for business or pleasure.

All of this is based upon a perceived, theoretical (and very inaccurate, skewed) risk of POTENTIAL FUTURE sexual criminal offending, a la the pre-crime of the movie Minority Report.

Additionally, the U.S. Federal Government refuses to issue a passport to anyone with an outstanding federal tax debt of at least $50,000.00, this before any criminal charges have been filed or a person has been convicted of a tax crime. Again, potential future crimes. Of course, they fear the person may flee the country and never return to settle the tax debt. Fair enough, but if that is the case, then charge them, arrest them, and try them; else, leave them alone.

Innocent until proven guilty? Not any longer in America apparently.

What this really comes down to are understandings of just what constitutes unconstitutional, compelled speech and whether domestic and international travel restrictions, housing restrictions, movement restrictions, etc., aren’t actually criminal punishment rather than just civil administrative, public safety policies.

You could even throw in the restrictions of a former felon with no violent weapon offense being forever banned from owning guns for personal protection, in violation of the Second Amendment. We know from 35 years of data that the argument of public safety holds no water. Given that, these can be seen as nothing less than intentional, vindictive criminal punishment (restrictions of constitutional rights) beyond the terms of the sentence without due process?

Does placing these types of restrictions on people past the terms of their original sentence or without any legal proceedings or due process constitute “punishment” rather than just “inconvenience”? I believe it clearly does. These types of extra-legal punishments need to be litigated out of existence or legislatively abolished. Failing that, it is a sad joke to call America a free country where all citizens enjoy protected, constitutional rights.

Kyle is a person required to register on the sex offender registry in Colorado.

The post Due Process: Another one bites the dust first appeared on NARSOL.