The U.S Justice Department’s Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART) summarizes the most important sections of International Megan’s Law (IML) to Prevent Child Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes Through Advanced Notification of Traveling Sex Offenders. The U.S Justice Department’s Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART) summarizes the most important sections of International Megan’s Law (IML) to Prevent Child Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes Through Advanced Notification of Traveling Sex Offenders.
For the purposes of substantial implementation, the requirements for international travel notifications as previously laid out in the Supplemental Guidelines continue to govern. Practitioners should be advised, however, that because of Congress’ specific placement of the offenders’ requirement to provide advance notice of international travel in the text of SORNA’s statutory requirements via IML, the SMART Office will closely examine jurisdictions’ policies and procedures regarding international travel notifications during any review of whether a jurisdiction has substantially implemented — or continues to substantially implement — SORNA. IML provides that the Department of State shall not issue a passport to a “covered sex offender” unless the passport contains a “unique identifier.” Other issues addressed in this report regarding the implementation of IML are 1) whether the SMART Office can process international travel notices; 2) whether the Smart Office can advise sex offenders on whether they have to provide notice of international travel; and 3) whether a sex offender will be prevented from entering another country.
Downloads
No download available
Similar Publications
- Family social support during incarceration: implications for health upon release
- Understanding the Impact of Forensic Evidence on Homicide Clearance: An Analysis of Los Angeles Homicide Cases, 1990-2010
- Targeting the "Absence" in a Desistance Framework: Balancing Risk and Rehabilitation in Mandated Criminal Background Check Employment Decisions