[HN Gopher] British tourist detained by US authorities for 10 da...
___________________________________________________________________
British tourist detained by US authorities for 10 days over visa
issue
Author : n1b0m
Score : 145 points
Date : 2025-03-10 18:32 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
| morkalork wrote:
| Second time today I read about this kind of story:
| https://www.10news.com/news/team-10/it-is-like-jail-german-m...
| vvpan wrote:
| I am starting to understand why "Abolish the ICE" has been a
| slogan, sounds like a cesspool of heavy-handed extra-judicial
| lawlessness. Another key slogan phrase: Do not open for the ICE.
| moralestapia wrote:
| The story is missing an important detail, I'm not assuming malice
| btw, why was she refused entry into Canada as well?
|
| Edit: Lol, there's literally nothing wrong with this observation.
| HN has truly gone down the gutter. I know not everybody here is
| part of the hivemind but the few that are completely spoil the
| experience for everybody else.
| rdtsc wrote:
| That's what I was confused about. I was thinking my add
| blocking maybe cut out a paragraph from the text at first.
|
| > Canadian authorities told her to go back to the US and fill
| in new paperwork before returning to cross into Canada.
|
| If it's not mistake, and the article is complete, it sounds
| like the reporter skipped some important details about what
| Canada did. Hopefully an honest mistake.
| dmix wrote:
| Canada has been cracking down on their border for the last
| year as well since the student worker controversy. It says:
|
| > She was planning to stay with a host family where she would
| carry out domestic chores in exchange for accommodation and
| was told she should have applied for a working visa, instead
| of a tourist visa
|
| She probably told the Canadian border that was her plan in
| Canada as well and told her she needs a work visa. Basically
| like a live in house keeper.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| She was not detained by Canada's border service.
| toast0 wrote:
| Canada's border service sent her back to the US. At that
| point, the US can't exactly tell her to go back to Canada,
| and have her walk back and forth until the problem solves
| itself.
|
| Immigration detention pending a return to the country of
| origin seems reasonable at that point. 10 days of detention
| to figure out transportation to the country of origin doesn't
| seem reasonable though.
| Aloha wrote:
| > and have her walk back and forth until the problem solves
| itself.
|
| God I had a memory of _Lemmings_ pop up. Thank you for
| that, it made me smile.
| moralestapia wrote:
| Can you quote the specific part of my comment (or anybody's
| comment) where such thing is claimed?
| fortran77 wrote:
| And none of the USA-bashers here seem to care about that. It
| got me thinking there's more to this story, too.
| quackscience wrote:
| Probably shouldn't tell border patrol you're doing unpaid labor
| in a country you're visiting. When speaking to authorities it's
| best to say the absolute minimum required for the encounter.
| chasil wrote:
| I've never had anything to do with foreign exchange students,
| but are they absolutely prohibited from work of any kind?
|
| If there is ambiguity, then we can't have them here.
| aaomidi wrote:
| Basically.
| toast0 wrote:
| In the US, it's very clear. If they don't have work
| authorization from USCIS, they shouldn't be doing work.
| There's some guidelines out there on the internet [1], but
| the students should be extremely careful; any form of
| compensation or expectation of future compensation for their
| work could put them in serious trouble. The University of
| Michigan has a more fleshed out guideline page for their
| international students [2].
|
| [1] https://marksgray.com/immigration-blog/can-foreign-
| nationals...
|
| [2]
| https://internationalcenter.umich.edu/students/employment-
| vo...
| actionfromafar wrote:
| Musk is lucky enforcement wasn't as strict back then.
| korkybuchek wrote:
| > but are they absolutely prohibited from work of any kind?
|
| Generally yes.
|
| But you can have on-campus jobs to supplement your income,
| and there are at least two programs (CPT and OPT) that let
| you get approval for limited-term employment in your area of
| study. CPT also requires university approval.
| kccqzy wrote:
| Both would require university approval. OPT is literally
| structured as a course at the university.
| davidgay wrote:
| You can also do OPT "post-completion" of your degree -
| this also gives your (new) employer some time to apply
| for a longer-term work visa.
| yandie wrote:
| And you need to get work authorization (EAD card) for
| that. It's not a given
| bakul wrote:
| She was on a tourist visa. She should have gotten a J-1 visa
| who can do 20 hours/week part time work with some
| constraints. Some details about this visa:
| https://yfuusa.org/2024/05/16/j1-student-visa/
| sergers wrote:
| or dont lie, apply for appropriate work permits/visa
| entries/travel authorizations if you are going to work whether
| its paid or not.
| dmix wrote:
| You can get banned from coming to the US if they catch you
| lying about the reason you're crossing the border. It's a
| long arduous process and lawyer fees to get the ban
| overturned. Happened to a Canadian I knew a decade ago when
| they tried to enter on a tourist visa for business purposes.
|
| I'm sure it's similar in other countries but US has always
| been very strict given the huge amount of people trying to
| work there and the very finite supply of work visas.
|
| From my experience you'll also get extra scruntiny if you're
| traveling solo like this girl. I was secondary screened twice
| coming for business where they double checked my paperwork
| and TSA lady in the back asked a bunch of silly questions
| (like "what is PayPal").
| hdjjhhvvhga wrote:
| Statements like these make me happy I live in Europe.
| quitit wrote:
| Just some of my personal anecdotes:
|
| I was travelling to Ireland(Dublin) as a tourist and during
| questioning by a border agent I mentioned that I might check
| my email (they noticed my laptop), the border agent simply
| advised me that my visa did not allow work but since I was
| clearly being transparent about my actions and intentions
| that there was no reason for them to block me or require me
| to apply for a working visa, so after what was a friendly
| chat, I was on my way.
|
| I've also had similar interactions in other European
| countries such as Germany(Munich) and the UK(London Gatwick)
| - both of which are particularly thorny about economic
| migrants posing as other types of visitors or asylum seekers,
| again no problems and the staff are courteous while
| conducting their duties professionally.
|
| Meanwhile my last trip to the USA during Trump 1.0 involved
| the border agent not even speaking to me, but instead holding
| out his hand for paperwork - so I'd hand him a paper, and if
| it wasn't the one he wanted, he'd _flick_ it back at me. It
| 's obvious he's just trying to start shit so he can have an
| excuse to abuse the power granted to him. (LaGuardia
| Airport).
| j7ake wrote:
| It is way harder for an Iranian to travel to Europe as a
| tourist than for them to travel to USA. Especially if you
| travel often like once a year.
|
| USA has 10 year tourist visas. Europe gives you the bare
| minimum to visit every time.
| yandie wrote:
| European country really gave me bad taste when it comes to
| visa experience. Gave me the absolute minimum despite having
| a good paying job - and even after marrying a EU citizen I
| still had a hard time.
|
| This is news because this woman happens to be from a
| developed country and not a developing countries.
| kube-system wrote:
| Barter isn't really "unpaid", but you also just shouldn't be
| working if you don't have work authorization. Border
| authorities have the means and motivation to validate any story
| you have about your stay.
| Svip wrote:
| Frankly, I wouldn't dare to overstay my tourist visa in the US
| either 10 or 20 years ago. The articles notes "four month", a
| standard US tourist visa for an ESTA country (e.g. the UK) would
| grant 90 days upon arrival; any travel within Canada counts too.
| Canada, however, grants 180 days, helping explain why Canada may
| not have seen an issue. Whenever travelling elsewhere for more
| than 1 month, check _everything_; including your travel
| insurance, most only last 60 days.
| toast0 wrote:
| > helping explain why Canada may not have seen an issue
|
| The article seems to indicate that Canada did have an issue:
|
| > Canadian authorities told her to go back to the US and fill
| in new paperwork before returning to cross into Canada.
|
| It seems that she was detained after re-entering the US upon
| being refused entry into Canada.
| Svip wrote:
| Ah. I missed that; maybe Canada only recognises the US visa
| stay if one entered the US first. I did this research back in
| 2017, and I may misremember some details.
| sergers wrote:
| i think she was "working" but potentially
| unpaid/compensated in lodging staying a t
| https://www.workaway.info/ (which was reported by the BBC
| where she was staying)
| toast0 wrote:
| This site now has a popup for the US
|
| > Important information about visiting: United States >
| If you are NOT a US CITIZEN and are planning to visit to
| work, volunteer or study, YOU WILL NEED THE CORRECT VISA.
| To find out more information you need to contact the
| embassy in your home country BEFORE traveling.
|
| But a quick look around near me looks like work for
| immigration purposes, so someone on a tourist visa to the
| US should not be participating.
| pclmulqdq wrote:
| If you are trying to get a visa anywhere, it's very standard
| for them to ask if you have ever been denied entry to any
| country, and it raises a lot of red flags (regardless of the
| reason). It's entirely possible she mentioned the denial when
| talking to the US authorities, and that caused them to detain
| her until she could be suitably deported.
| ta1243 wrote:
| I suspect that people don't read the small print about the 90
| days counting for your entire time on the continent. That said
| it's unclear her exact itinerary from the story
|
| Ultimately if you go to a hostile country though, you need to
| have a good support network. You wouldn't travel to say China
| and breach your visa. The US is a hostile country and should be
| treated as such.
| decimalenough wrote:
| If she is on a "four-month backpacking trip around North America"
| and tried to return to the US, she has exceeded the 90-day limit
| allowed by the Visa Waiver Program (which counts days both in the
| US and "adjacent territories") and is now an illegal overstayer.
| The unpaid labor stuff and getting refused entry to Canada is
| icing on the cake.
|
| For the record, I'm no fan of ICE/CBP, but it looks like they're
| just enforcing the law here.
| viraptor wrote:
| Enforcing the law is one thing. If they refused entry or forced
| her to fly back immediately, nobody would care much. Detaining
| is all of: cruel, expensive, unnecessary.
| toast0 wrote:
| Forcing her to fly back immediately (and detaining until the
| flight if not immediate) seems reasonable, but both countries
| at a land crossing can't refuse entry. The article states she
| was refused entry to Canada, and then detained when she
| returned to the US; I don't know if there are international
| norms here, but I think in this situation if both countries
| would refuse entry, one of them has to accept entry and
| consider immigration detention; and it doesn't seem unfair
| for that to be the country where the person in question was
| before the first crossing?
| viraptor wrote:
| Sure, they could consider detention. But then there are
| daily flights back to the UK. Anything beyond an overnight
| stay (if necessary for the wait) is unfair.
| averageRoyalty wrote:
| I'm not convinced it's the Americans responsibility to
| get her back to a suitable international airport as
| quickly as possible and put her in the next flight out.
| 10 days does seem excessive, but I don't see why she
| should be a priority either. I would imagine up to 5
| working days fits within the realm of 'reasonable'.
| gopher_space wrote:
| Feel free to not encage people if you don't like the
| responsibility.
| wat10000 wrote:
| A full work week in jail for something that isn't even a
| crime is ridiculous.
| stefan_ wrote:
| Yeah, what's habeas corpus.
| psychlops wrote:
| A legal procedure that protects citizens, which she
| isn't.
| amanaplanacanal wrote:
| Nah. Habeus Corpus applies to everybody in the US, not
| just citizens.
| xethos wrote:
| Dictating they buy one of the most expensive flights (one
| of the immediate ones taking off that day) probably isn't
| a great look either. Like so much else with law
| enforcement, they look like shit because of the system
| and incentives set up.
|
| Some do it themselves and are malicious for no good
| reason, but not literally every time.
| viraptor wrote:
| You don't get a free flight. Typically either your return
| ticket is moved if possible, or the airline will claim
| the cost from you. There's a number of regulations and
| airline rules, but in general - unless the airline messed
| up checks at boarding, you're getting charged for the
| flight back.
| lepton wrote:
| That's the parent's point: a same-day flight may be
| expensive for the detainee and look bad for ICE.
| dmix wrote:
| Sounds like she was surviving doing chores in exchange
| for a place to sleep (in two different countries). It's
| possible she didn't have a plane ticket lined up.
| orwin wrote:
| It's so expensive to not take a return ticket, I doubt
| she didn't had a return plane ticket. Maybe she moved her
| flight or missed it, but only rich people don't buy a
| return ticket.
| nomdep wrote:
| She might even have done this on purpose to get a free
| ride home
| toast0 wrote:
| This page[1] says "The majority of removals are carried
| out by air at U.S. government expense." which sounds like
| a free flight to me. Looking at prices, a near term one-
| way, no stops flight is about $500. There's some
| expensive days, and if you wait two weeks, you can save
| about $70 on the flight ... doesn't seem to be worth the
| wait, assuming detention costs are more than $5/day. But
| I'd say waiting a few days to avoid some of the $1000+
| flights would make sense.
|
| Generally I'd expect a deportation process to take quite
| some time because immigration courts have not been
| properly staffed. But I would have expected ICE to offer
| either a withdrawal of application, or voluntary
| deportation, both of which involve travel arrangements at
| the alien's expense in order to expedite removal. I think
| it's probably in the person's better interest to pay for
| a ticket home (hopefully with some credit for their
| previously scheduled flight) if they were planning on
| returning home anyway; better to go home early than sit
| out your trip in immigration detention.
|
| [1] https://www.usa.gov/deportation-process
| Klonoar wrote:
| There is no world where that bad look means throw them in
| a prison cell to languish.
| jkaplowitz wrote:
| 10 days and counting of immigration detention (possibly
| more in the end since she's still detained) plus whatever
| deportation ICE would eventually conduct undoubtedly
| costs more than the flight you're describing.
|
| Meanwhile, her British MP has relayed the family's
| request to arrange voluntary departure, so the trip home
| wouldn't even be at government expense.
|
| ICE has no legitimate excuse to be slow about permitting
| voluntary departure unless they're planning to prosecute
| her criminally, think she won't actually go through with
| the voluntary departure, or think she will commit crimes
| before voluntarily departing. None of those seem likely
| in the scenario we're discussing.
|
| The political environment of the Trump administration may
| very well be an explanation for why they're not quickly
| permitting this, but an explanation is not an excuse.
| dessimus wrote:
| > Detaining is all of: cruel, expensive, unnecessary.
|
| What about those poor private prison corporations that are
| being deprived of an income?! How dare you! /s
| anigbrowl wrote:
| [delayed]
| kennysoona wrote:
| There's a right and a wrong way to enforce the law, though.
|
| Putting her in a literal prison and in an orange jumpsuit is
| overkill. Clearly she just screwed up and thought what she was
| doing was ok, but isn't a threat. Let her go back to the UK and
| no longer be eligible for ESTA. How is that not sufficient?
| immibis wrote:
| BTW this would not be the public majority opinion if she was
| a black man.
| timeon wrote:
| It seems shocking from European perspective. At least they
| did not shot her because of resisting or something.
| toast0 wrote:
| The article says
|
| > She had previously been staying with a host family in
| Portland, Oregon, under a similar arrangement after spending
| some time sightseeing in New York City, where she first arrived
| from the UK at the start of the year.
|
| This article is like one of those tricky word problems where
| they try to hide information, and you have to piece it
| together, but I think the trip was planned for four months, but
| if she only entered the US after the start of the year, she
| can't have overstayed a 90-day visa as of yet. Perhaps her plan
| was to go to Canada 10 days ago and spend the rest of her time
| there, departing back to the UK from Canada and not transiting
| the US on the way back; I don't know the details of Canada
| immigration, but someone elsewhere in the thread indicates a
| 180 day limit was common; and I'd assume that would start on
| first entry to Canada, so the duration of the stay would be
| fine in that case. Or perhaps her plan was to come back to the
| US after a side trip to Canada and then depart from the US to
| the UK, in which case her planned trip is outside the limit,
| but she hasn't overstayed yet.
|
| But I think the issue seems to be more likely because of doing
| work on a tourist visa, which was subject to scrutiny because
| Canada denied entry, likely over planning to work on a tourist
| visa? Canada does have the International Experience Canada
| (IEC) Program [1] which allows for young adults aged 18 to 35
| (18 to 30 in some countries) to work in Canada while visiting,
| but afaik, the US has nothing similar.
|
| [1] https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-
| citizenship/se...
| gobblegobble2 wrote:
| The article says "[she] was told she should have applied for a
| working visa, instead of a tourist visa", so it's fair to
| assume she had a proper B2 tourist visa, which lets you stay
| for 6 months.
| lastofthemojito wrote:
| I don't think enforcing the law is the problem so much as the
| reaction. Why is she jailed rather than simply placed on one of
| the daily nonstops from Sea-Tac to Heathrow?
| thfuran wrote:
| That plan doesn't have enough suffering.
| threatofrain wrote:
| Given the sum of facts, poor vacation planning is a fair
| interpretation of the final story. There's a general absence of
| hostility towards the US in this story and instead a sense of
| attraction and willingness to spend vacation time and money
| here.
|
| We should be directing the treatment of such minor offenses
| through polished administrative pathways and not 10 days in
| prison. That person will likely not come back ever again, and
| it's a shame because there's every indication that this woman
| would be a fine visitor and customer to local businesses, US
| and Canadian.
|
| They're just here for pure sightseeing under the most amicable
| of moods. 10 days in prison.
| buyucu wrote:
| detaining for 10 days is nonsense. Just deny entry and send
| them back.
| almog wrote:
| It's not clear from the article whether she exceeded the 90 day
| limit on any single entry. However, there is no limit on the
| number of times a visitor can re-enter and use their 90 day
| visa. It's up the the immigration officer's discretion to
| decide whether or not to admit them under that visa again but
| assuming one exit and enter within 90 days there's no legal
| issue with re-entering again immediately.
| Aloha wrote:
| Good catch, I didnt quite catch that she was denied reentry to
| Canada!
| wrp wrote:
| I have long suspected the reason for aggressive treatment of
| minor offenders is that they are an easy target and a quick way
| to meet your prosecution quota.
|
| I have many times heard about foreign students who come to the
| USA under completely proper arrangements but run afoul of
| immigration because of some innocent remark. My advice to
| visitors is to never mention to officials any circumstance in
| which you might come into contact with business or financial
| operations.
| nxobject wrote:
| Speaking of quotas: I wouldn't surprised if part of the reason
| for her lengthy detention was "we have to meet jail occupancy
| targets" (or "we have to boost our jail occupancy metrics".)
| Hamuko wrote:
| My solution is just to avoid the US like the plague. This is
| after the countless of stories of people being detained at the
| border, having their electronics gone through and having to
| report all of your social media accounts for some fucking
| reason.
| dmix wrote:
| I doubt there needs to be some higher agenda. At the border
| you're at the whims of power tripping border guards and TSA. A
| whole lot can happen if you get the wrong person who's in a bad
| mood or simply confused. And once flagged you get pushed into a
| byzantine process and the next person you speak to won't care
| how you got into it or if the first guy was unfair, the process
| is the process.
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| It sounds like she was rightfully detained, but it seems crazy to
| hold her for 10+ days. Why not just let her get back on a flight
| to the UK and tell her not to come back for 10 years or whatever.
| criddell wrote:
| Yeah, some details are definitely missing.
| parliament32 wrote:
| My understanding is that they typically do, you book your own
| ticket for and they put you on a plane, even later the same day
| if you want. They'll only keep you in detention if you're
| trying to fight the deportation and have to wait for a hearing,
| or if you have no way to pay for a ticket -- then they find a
| low-cost ticket some time out and hold you until then.
| sergers wrote:
| i was following this on another site before it showed up here:
|
| 1)UK citizens dont need a visa perse coming into canada as a
| tourist
|
| 1b) electronic travel authorization form is not required for UK
| citizens coming to canada over land border.
|
| 2)she was staying at Workaway, which depending on how you
| interpret/misinterpret is "working" (which it possibly is, a
| little shady on what they are.) so canada may have thought she
| was going to work... which a tourist visa doesnt cover
|
| so my guess is canadian authorities felt she was coming here to
| work, which she didnt have the proper paperwork so got denied.
|
| USA authorities upon re-entry attempt, probably felt she is
| scamming the ESTA 90 days being on a "4 month" trip, staying at
| workaway locations... and playing devils advocate, there is no
| proof that this is NOT what she was trying to do... going to a
| short trip in canada before going back thinking it resets ESTA
| (they have to be gone from usa for a reasonable time)
|
| so much unknowns.
|
| i think they were right to detain her/deny her entry... but the
| length of detainment is at issue.
|
| very first thing i think of when viewing their site is this is
| some lodging for volunteer/unpaid labour.
| https://www.workaway.info/
| cco wrote:
| > very first thing i think of when viewing their site is this
| is some lodging for volunteer/unpaid labour.
| https://www.workaway.info/
|
| I'm certainly not an immigration lawyer but my understanding is
| that _no_ work, none, even in exchange for room and board, is
| allowed on a tourist visa in the US.
|
| Workaway looks like it isn't compatible with a tourist visa in
| the US and their website doesn't really call that out. Seems
| like something that nine times out of ten if you're just quiet
| about it it'll never come up and you'd be fine.
|
| But unfortunately Canada refused entry and then questions were
| asked. Rough.
| Terretta wrote:
| _"Generally you will be expected to help around 5 hours per
| day in exchange for food and accommodation. Some hosts may
| give a paid allowance to ensure they are offering at least
| the minimum wage in their country."_
| carabiner wrote:
| You can just say reddit:
| https://www.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/1j7qumk/uk_girl_sw...
| layman51 wrote:
| Earlier this month, the Guardian also had an article of a German
| tourist who crossed over the land border (San Ysidro Port of
| Entry, I assume) who was detained for a long while too. The
| details seemed kind of similar to this situation where it
| involves suspicion of tourists working in the USA without the
| proper authorizations.
| buyucu wrote:
| there is a second german tourist now in the same situation,
| detained while trying to visit his fiancee:
| https://old.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1j7xjhf/it_is_li...
| manosyja wrote:
| Couple days ago there was a report of another German tourist
| being arrested and held without legal counsel.
| ajmurmann wrote:
| It seems like there was good reason for these concerns that the
| person was going to work. However, the person was right there
| at the border. Why did we not just turn them back around. I
| don't think they had overstayed their time in Mexico? Further
| they had a return flight weeks ago. AFAIk we have been paying
| to keep this person detained for over a month now. Why not at
| least put them on their original flight back. This entire
| approach with detention and deportations seems a very expensive
| solution.
|
| Edit: In general it seems that if the goal is to reduce illegal
| immigration, it would be much cheaper to deter most illegal
| migrants who generally come for economic reasons by fining
| employers of workers without permits. Instead of cost it brings
| in money and the illegal workers will deport themselves if all
| work dries up.
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| While I don't like the whole "detaining people instead of just
| turning them around", but the German you are referring to was a
| tattoo artist who had posted on their instagram that they were
| doing pop-up tattoo events in LA, and then tried to enter on a
| tourist visa. She very much was in violation of the law, in
| other words.
| buyucu wrote:
| just deny entry. detaining someone for multiple months for
| tattoos is evil.
| buyucu wrote:
| I will be avoiding all US travel in the near future. No need to
| get close to this kind of lunacy.
| jmyeet wrote:
| Here's an example of how broken the discourse is over immigration
| and how the media has grossly failed with their responsibility in
| reporting something remotely factual.
|
| The majority of undocumented migrants aren't border crosses.
| They're visa overstayers [1].
|
| And of course the "migrant crime" hysteria is completely made up.
| Despite there being at least 10 million undocumented migrants,
| the number of murders commited by both documented and
| undocumented migrants in 2024 was 29 [2]. Not 29,000. TWENTY
| NINE. That's a per-capita crime rate significantly lower than the
| American population.
|
| [1]: https://www.npr.org/2019/01/16/686056668/for-seventh-
| consecu...
|
| [2]: https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/cbp-enforcement-
| statistic...
| n1b0m wrote:
| A similar story about Ice detaining a German tourist in
| California indefinitely. Jessica Brosche has spent more than a
| month in detention center after being denied entry at San Diego
| from Mexico.
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/03/ice-german-t...
| DidYaWipe wrote:
| The hypocrisy of everything under this administration boggles
| the mind. "You're here illegally! No, we won't let you leave!"
| ohgr wrote:
| I think it's malicious incompetence.
|
| They probably rolled this out so fast and fired everyone who
| could manage it at the same time that it's running at the
| stage of "how do we not starve these people" levels of chaos.
|
| What a shit show though.
| bloomingeek wrote:
| I have English relatives, my son-in-laws family, lovely
| people. They want to come visit again, but are concerned
| about the craziness of the current administration. When they
| visit, they spend plenty of money and have a great time. Does
| the GOP think tourists from other countries aren't paying
| attention?!?
| anigbrowl wrote:
| More than one: https://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/usa-einreise-
| zweiter-deutscher-... (in German)
| Razengan wrote:
| Hot Take: People should be allowed to travel and live wherever
| they want, if they can work/pay for it and follow local laws.
| paulsutter wrote:
| Little known fact: traveling to Canada, Mexico, or the Caribbean
| doesnt extend your 90 day visit to the US, in fact you keep the
| original 90 day stamp so the days spent in those places
| essentially count against the 90 days.
|
| This is a convenience for travelers to North America, you only
| need to enter the US once. But seems like she wasn't aware of
| this.
| justforonepost wrote:
| Crazy as it seems I feel it's not safe to say this on my main
| account any more - I've done more than 100 trips to the US for
| work in the last decade but I've now concluded I've done my last
| for a few years at least. There's been a real uptick in these
| stories and now people legally in the US are being actively
| targeted and effectively disappeared for speech it doesn't feel
| like normalcy or due process apply. Similarly I wouldn't have
| visited China during the cultural revolution.
| timeon wrote:
| This can potentially accelerate more in US than in China
| because of for-profit prisons.
| motbus3 wrote:
| I'm just waiting for this immigration crackdown to be done with
| and then we'll need to see who will be blamed for bad economy
| numbers.
| stevenwoo wrote:
| They are ahead of you already, they are going to fudge/hide the
| numbers. https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/trump-admin-
| disbands-two... This is like Soviet/CCCP style make the numbers
| match the plan sort of thing.
| codedokode wrote:
| A reasonable response to this for UK govt would be to check
| American tourists and see if they are properly complying with the
| law. Law is so complicated, no way you can't find at least one
| violation.
|
| Also, the article states that other people in the prison had been
| there for much longer time ("months"), but nobody writes articles
| about them.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-03-10 23:01 UTC)