PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 19, 2009
International Megan's Law of 2009 - Requires registered sex offenders to notify appropriate jurisdictions of their intent to travel not later than 21 days before their departure or arrival in the United States. Imposes a fine and/or prison term of up to 10 years for failure to report such travel.
Requires diplomatic or consular missions in each foreign country to establish and maintain a countrywide sex offender registry for sex offenders from the United States who temporarily or permanently reside in such country.
Directs the Commissioner of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to issue directives for the assessment of sex offenders whose travel is reported to determine whether such offenders are high risk sex offenders.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the President to establish the International Sex Offender Travel Center to monitor the travel of high risk sex offenders.
Authorizes the Secretary of State to rescind the passports of individuals awaiting trial for a sex offense against a minor or a permanent resident who has been convicted of such an offense.
Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to make convicted sex offenders inadmissible to the United States.
Amends the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 to include in the annual report of the Secretary of State on the status of severe forms of human trafficking efforts of foreign countries to identify and provide notice of international travel by sex offenders.
Encourages the President to use authorities under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to assist foreign countries in identifying and providing notice of sex offenders traveling to the United States and other countries.
Sets forth reporting requirements relating to the travel of international sex offenders and the implementation of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Christopher H. [R-NJ-4] · R–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Referred to House Judiciary
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to House Foreign Affairs
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1623 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1623 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1623 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1623 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.