22 C.F.R. § 51.61

Denial of passports to certain convicted drug traffickers

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) A passport may not be issued in any case in which the Department determines or is informed by competent authority that the applicant is subject to imprisonment or supervised release as the result of a felony conviction for a Federal or state drug offense, if the individual used a U.S. passport or otherwise crossed an international border in committing the offense, including a felony conviction arising under:

(1) The Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) or the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 951 et seq.); or

(2) Any Federal law involving controlled substances as defined in section 802 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.); or

(3) The Bank Secrecy Act (31 U.S.C. 5311 et seq.) or the Money Laundering Act (18 U.S.C. 1956 et seq.) if the Department is in receipt of information that supports the determination that the violation involved is related to illicit production of or trafficking in a controlled substance; or

(4) Any state law involving the manufacture, distribution, or possession of a controlled substance.

(b) A passport may be refused in any case in which the Department determines or is informed by competent authority that the applicant is subject to imprisonment or supervised release as the result of a misdemeanor conviction of a Federal or state drug offense if the individual used a U.S. passport or otherwise crossed an international border in committing the offense, other than a first conviction for possession of a controlled substance, including a misdemeanor conviction arising under:

(1) The Federal statutes described in § 51.61(a); or

(2) Any State law involving the manufacture, distribution, or possession of a controlled substance.

(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section, the Department may issue a passport when the competent authority confirms, or the Department otherwise finds, that emergency circumstances or humanitarian reasons exist.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1978–2020 · leading case: Zzyym v. Pompeo, 958 F.3d 1014 (10th Cir. 2020).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Zzyym v. Pompeo, 958 F.3d 1014 (10th Cir. 2020). “60 (g)), or has obtained a conviction for drug trafficking ( 22 C.F.R. § 51.61 ). The State Department thus underscored two facts bearing on the need for consistency in data recorded by different federal agencies: 1.”

Platz v. Hamilton, 653 P.2d 144 (Mont. 1982). “” 22 C.F.R. §51.61 (b). Platz contends that she should be allowed to retain this execution fee for her personal use.”

Opinion No. 78-156 (1978) Ag (Okla. Att’y Gen. 1978). “A, 421 and 22 C.F.R., 51.61 which provides as follows: "Except as provided in Section 51.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.