
U.S. will suspend all travel from Europe for 30 days - sahin-boydas
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-make-prime-time-address-coronavirus-wednesday-night-n1155941
======
unlinked_dll
Regardless of the ability of people to travel to the UK or Canada and get here
(which people have done for a long time with other nations we don't take
kindly to) it's absolutely going to reduce the number of people who will
travel across the pond. Which is the goal, reduce infection rates.

My concern is how economies are going to respond to the US being cut off from
Continental ports for a month, which as far as I can tell hasn't happened
since U boats were in open waters.

Can anyone comment on supply chains that rely on Europe to source goods? I
know medical grade steel comes from over there, but I don't know what else.

Edit: apparently the president misspoke.

~~~
Frost1x
>Which is the goal, reduce infection rates.

Based on the localized infection cases I see across the US and have been
watching as well as the characteristics of the virus (life outside host/on
surfaces, in air, the degree of asymptomatic transference, etc.), it's _well_
beyond containment IMHO.

Travel isn't going to do too much to reduce infection rates alone. We need
significant cultural changes to reduce infection rates, but I don't see that
happening for a variety of reasons. This country isn't about proactive action
and is all about reactionary action though, so we're just waiting for that
reactionary threshold. Some preventative measures have been pushed but they're
no where near aggressive enough at this point.

It will be interesting how this is handled in our modern cultural, current
political and work culture, etc. I suspect it's going to be fairly nasty but
certainly hope not. I've been advising my parents to stock up and minimize any
outside interactions for awhile.

~~~
rsj_hn
My 2 cents.

All reductions in (non-essential) travel are good in a pandemic. That doesn't
mean it's sufficient, but it's something positive.

I think we would all like to see stronger social distancing rules domestically
(in the US), but here the US has a problem as it granted the President broad
discretionary powers to suspend international travel but not domestic
gatherings, which can't be banned via executive order and even if congress
were to pass a law banning such gatherings, there would be first amendment
implications as well as federalism issues.

It's not easy to pass a law giving the President this type of power and I
suspect many in congress already rue passing the laws that gave the president
power to suspend international travel. That's one of the prices of living in a
federal government with separation of powers and a bill of rights guaranteeing
right to assembly rather than in a place like China.

For example, the CDC has issued social distancing guidelines but they are only
guidelines not laws: Santa Clara county has said "no thank you we'll follow
our own guidelines" instead, when the CDC asked to ban meetings of more than
250 but Santa Clara banned meetings of more than 1000, and just refused to
change their target to the CDC recommendation.

So the US simply lacks the tools that would allow the President to go on the
air and announce "I'm declaring that the MLB season needs to be delayed and
Disneyland must close." He can try to exert pressure, or rather have the CDC
exert pressure, but these types of declarations are not going to happen in
America.

~~~
KarlKemp
OP's point wasn't "this is only going to have very limited effect", to which
your reply "better than nothing" would be appropriate.

Their point is that there's absolutely no effect of banning travel between two
areas with similar prevalence, based on rather simple logic.

Take two bags with mostly white and a similar number of red balls in them.
Then, twenty times, grab one hand from each bag and empty it in the other.
What's the expected change in number of red balls?

~~~
rsj_hn
This is false. Any reduction in travel is going to have a positive effect. The
best situation is for people to reduce their exposure to other people and to
stay at home. If they do need to be exposed to others, the best is for them to
be exposed to the same set of people all the time, and not to different sets
of people.

~~~
bratawurst
This seems not fully worked out. Assuming total travel is constrained,
selectively limiting travel to particular areas concentrates travel in the
remaining areas, which increases the average number of contacts between
travelers, which violates your “reducing exposure to other people is best”
rule of thumb.

By your model, _some_ reductions in travel ought to have a negative effect. Is
that a fair corollary?

~~~
simonh
There’s no such thing as a fixed amount of travel, and constraining it on one
way concentrates it in another. That makes no sense. Constraining travel will
reduce travel, which will reduce interactions between people, which will
reduce the spread of the virus. We know this empirically from previous
outbreaks and countermeasures.

------
BryantD
Important updates:

a) This does not apply to US citizens or their family members[1].

b) This does not apply to cargo[2].

It appears that the President misspoke regarding point 2.

[1] [https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/03/11/homeland-security-
acting...](https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/03/11/homeland-security-acting-
secretary-chad-f-wolf-s-statement-presidential-proclamation).

[2]
[https://twitter.com/AnaSwanson/status/1237921160500830208](https://twitter.com/AnaSwanson/status/1237921160500830208)

~~~
anigbrowl
Misspoke? It was a prepared statement read off a teleprompter. Please don't
excuse it like a slip of the tongue.

~~~
lazugod
Are you saying it is more accurate to call it a lie?

~~~
ComputerGuru
I imagine what he meant was that the administration is now backtracking on
that statement.

~~~
anigbrowl
Yes. I don't think it was a lie since it would needlessly create problems, but
it was either the initial idea that was hastily revised after seeing the
market reaction, or rank carelessness.

It's fun to joke about a politician's gaffes, and simple verbal slips are
understandable - I noticed several in the speech but they were not substantive
or significant. However, I think when drafting and reading a preapred
statement on a topic of grave importance politicians have an obligation to say
what they actually mean.

------
verst
An executive order is not in effect until published in the federal register.
Whatever is published there is what actually matters.

As of now this executive order has not been published.

You can check here:
[https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/search?conditions%...](https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/search?conditions%5Bagencies%5D%5B%5D=executive-
office-of-the-
president&conditions%5Bpublication_date%5D%5Bgte%5D=03%2F11%2F2020)

~~~
verst
I assume the following [1] will be filed in the Federal Register beginning
with this paragraph that starts with:

    
    
      NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States
    

and then starting with the words

    
    
      by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America
    

[1]: [https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-
actions/proclamation...](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-
actions/proclamation-suspension-entry-immigrants-nonimmigrants-certain-
additional-persons-pose-risk-transmitting-2019-novel-coronavirus/)

~~~
verst
Here is the full text that will likely be published in the Federal Register.
Double-check when it has been published.

> by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United
> States of America, including sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration
> and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), and section 301 of title
> 3, United States Code, hereby find that the unrestricted entry into the
> United States of persons described in section 1 of this proclamation would,
> except as provided for in section 2 of this proclamation, be detrimental to
> the interests of the United States, and that their entry should be subject
> to certain restrictions, limitations, and exceptions. I therefore hereby
> proclaim the following:

> Section 1. Suspension and Limitation on Entry. The entry into the United
> States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, of all aliens who were physically
> present within the Schengen Area during the 14-day period preceding their
> entry or attempted entry into the United States is hereby suspended and
> limited subject to section 2 of this proclamation.

> Sec. 2. Scope of Suspension and Limitation on Entry.

> (a) Section 1 of this proclamation shall not apply to:

> (i) any lawful permanent resident of the United States;

> (ii) any alien who is the spouse of a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent
> resident;

> (iii) any alien who is the parent or legal guardian of a U.S. citizen or
> lawful permanent resident, provided that the U.S. citizen or lawful
> permanent resident is unmarried and under the age of 21;

> (iv) any alien who is the sibling of a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent
> resident, provided that both are unmarried and under the age of 21;

> (v) any alien who is the child, foster child, or ward of a U.S. citizen or
> lawful permanent resident, or who is a prospective adoptee seeking to enter
> the United States pursuant to the IR-4 or IH-4 visa classifications;

> (vi) any alien traveling at the invitation of the United States Government
> for a purpose related to containment or mitigation of the virus;

> (vii) any alien traveling as a nonimmigrant pursuant to a C-1, D, or C-1/D
> nonimmigrant visa as a crewmember or any alien otherwise traveling to the
> United States as air or sea crew;

> (viii) any alien

> (A) seeking entry into or transiting the United States pursuant to one of
> the following visas: A-1, A-2, C-2, C-3 (as a foreign government official or
> immediate family member of an official), E-1 (as an employee of TECRO or
> TECO or the employee’s immediate family members), G-1, G-2, G-3, G-4, NATO-1
> through NATO-4, or NATO-6 (or seeking to enter as a nonimmigrant in one of
> those NATO categories); or

> (B) whose travel falls within the scope of section 11 of the United Nations
> Headquarters Agreement;

> (ix) any alien whose entry would not pose a significant risk of introducing,
> transmitting, or spreading the virus, as determined by the Secretary of
> Health and Human Services, through the CDC Director or his designee;

> (x) any alien whose entry would further important United States law
> enforcement objectives, as determined by the Secretary of State, the
> Secretary of Homeland Security, or their respective designees, based on a
> recommendation of the Attorney General or his designee;

> (xi) any alien whose entry would be in the national interest, as determined
> by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or their
> designees; or

> (xii) members of the U.S. Armed Forces and spouses and children of members
> of the U.S. Armed Forces.

> (b) Nothing in this proclamation shall be construed to affect any
> individual’s eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal, or protection
> under the regulations issued pursuant to the legislation implementing the
> Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment
> or Punishment, consistent with the laws and regulations of the United
> States.

> Sec. 3. Implementation and Enforcement. (a) The Secretary of State shall
> implement this proclamation as it applies to visas pursuant to such
> procedures as the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of
> Homeland Security, may establish. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall
> implement this proclamation as it applies to the entry of aliens pursuant to
> such procedures as the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with
> the Secretary of State, may establish.

> (b) Consistent with applicable law, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of
> Transportation, and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall ensure that any
> alien subject to this proclamation does not board an aircraft traveling to
> the United States.

> (c) The Secretary of Homeland Security may establish standards and
> procedures to ensure the application of this proclamation at and between all
> United States ports of entry.

> (d) An alien who circumvents the application of this proclamation through
> fraud, willful misrepresentation of a material fact, or illegal entry shall
> be a priority for removal by the Department of Homeland Security.

> Sec. 4. Termination. This proclamation shall remain in effect until
> terminated by the President. The Secretary of Health and Human Services
> shall recommend that the President continue, modify, or terminate this
> proclamation as described in section 5 of Proclamation 9984, as amended.

> Sec. 5. Effective Date. This proclamation is effective at 11:59 p.m. eastern
> daylight time on March 13, 2020. This proclamation does not apply to persons
> aboard a flight scheduled to arrive in the United States that departed prior
> to 11:59 p.m. eastern daylight time on March 13, 2020.

> Sec. 6. Severability. It is the policy of the United States to enforce this
> proclamation to the maximum extent possible to advance the national
> security, public safety, and foreign policy interests of the United States.
> Accordingly:

> (a) if any provision of this proclamation, or the application of any
> provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the
> remainder of this proclamation and the application of its provisions to any
> other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby; and

> (b) if any provision of this proclamation, or the application of any
> provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid because of
> the lack of certain procedural requirements, the relevant executive branch
> officials shall implement those procedural requirements to conform with
> existing law and with any applicable court orders.

> Sec. 7. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this proclamation shall be
> construed to impair or otherwise affect:

> (i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or
> the head thereof; or

> (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget
> relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

> (b) This proclamation shall be implemented consistent with applicable law
> and subject to the availability of appropriations.

> (c) This proclamation is not intended to, and does not, create any right or
> benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any
> party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its
> officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

> IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this eleventh day of March,
> in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty, and of the Independence of the
> United States of America the two hundred and forty-fourth.

> DONALD J. TRUMP

------
knzhou
I get that they excluded the UK for diplomatic reasons, but it's literally
only a few days behind the rest of Europe in terms of infection count, which
means this will have almost no effect.

I actually think banning travel from China months ago was a good call, but by
analogous reasoning, the right time to ban travel from Europe (including the
UK) was last week.

~~~
TMWNN
>I get that they excluded the UK for diplomatic reasons

No, Ireland is also exempt. In other words, the US is banning travel from the
Schengen Zone.

~~~
Ericson2314
Doesn't mean it's not still partly political, to be clear.

~~~
mantap
It's rational. UK epidemic is not yet out of control. If you look at the
region breakdown in UK the cases are very well geographically distributed, the
highest concentration as of yesterday is Hertfordshire with only 13 cases, or
London with 100 cases if you consider that one administrative unit. Some
epidemics in Schengen are highly focused on specific areas which means the
growth rate can be expected to be higher. It makes sense to consider Schengen
as one unit as it has open borders. It would make little sense to ban travel
from individual countries in Schengen.

------
zuminator
Is there anywhere in the US where we are doing random testing of residents to
determine what the real infection rate is here? From all I can see we're
currently just adding up the number of people who have come in with symptoms
and tested positive instead of getting a real handle on what percentage of the
population is infected. The CDC website right now says that there are 938
total cases.[1] That's laughable. At this point I'd sooner believe 93,800 or
938,000 than 938. Oh wait: "Now that states are testing and reporting their
own results, CDC’s numbers are not representative of all testing being done
nationwide." OK, so nobody's keeping up with the totals? Is that what I'm
reading?

[1] [https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-in-
us.html](https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-in-us.html)

~~~
Polylactic_acid
I would think we be able to estimate fairly correctly. I assume pretty much
everyone who dies from it would end up in a hospital and counted. And since we
know the death rate, we know for every 1 death there were x who have it and
will/have recovered.

~~~
0xBA5ED
Except the death rate is determined by deaths/cases, which relies on counting
the cases.

------
brookside
NBA season suspended after an Utah Jazz player, Rudy Golbert, preliminarily
tests positive.

This shortly following Golbert jokingly (ugh) rubbing all of the mics at an
interview:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qxtxIVtOZE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qxtxIVtOZE)

~~~
fudged71
That guy did a little joke which turned into shutting down the whole league.
What the hell

------
Scoundreller
Meanwhile, the US Dept of State's Travel Advisories haven't really been
recommending any restrictions on travel to Europe.

France is the 2nd most impacted country in Europe, and the DoS' last update
was 11 months ago where their primary concern was terrorism.

[https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/...](https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/traveladvisories/france-
travel-advisory.html)

Only Italy is currently at "Reconsider Travel" or "Do Not Travel" for the
Northern regions.

~~~
sitkack
At least they are consistent. Following at a far enough distance gives you
20/20 hindsight for those you follow, but only if you can internalize the
lesson fast enough. Otherwise you just slo-mo replicate their same mistakes.

------
bratawurst
This is insane. I haven’t been really scared of the pandemic yet, but if this
is the response, now, I’m terrified.

Changing the number of infected people entering the community does nothing
when we already have transmission happening _within the community_ at some
fixed rate which is determined _by the community_.

“Flattening the curve” of an exponential function means changing the rate of
growth, not the fucking constant offset.

It’s basic math. Innocent people will die off this incompetence. I’m a little
lost for words.

~~~
arbitrary_name
Who's going to die because they can't fly between the US and Europe?

~~~
logicchains
People dying isn't the only consideration; public policy isn't made with the
assumption "save human life at all costs", otherwise e.g. private cars (which
kill 1-2 million people per year and injure tens of millions more) would be
banned by now.

------
klintcho
One thing though; which airline will fly _only_ american citizen back from
europe? will they fill a plane with those customers only? I think my main
concern is that most if not all major European airlines will cancel all
flights, regardless if there are a couple of US citizen on the flights.
Meaning it's probably still going to be somewhat problematic to get back (if
not from London then of course)

~~~
thyselius
I'm trying to find more information about this, as I'm a tourist visiting the
US flying back on Sunday. Does anyone know how this will play out, will they
keep flying FROM the US to Europe?

~~~
raxxorrax
The levenshtein distance between tourist and terrorist is only 4, so my
prognosis looks bleak.

But fun aside, I think you are still fine. To my knowledge no flights from the
US seem to be cancelled so far. If they really do cancel flights, you could
try to use another route trough another EU country. But I think that is still
unlikely to be required. That might change though, but probably not until
Sunday.

~~~
rmsaksida
> The levenshtein distance between tourist and terrorist is only 4, so my
> prognosis looks bleak.

The distance in speech is not that far off either, I've found. When I visited
the US for the first time, the border agent asked me what I was there for.
Tourism, I said. My English pronunciation not being clear enough, he said
"excuse me? Can you say that again? TERRORISM?". After that I learned to just
say "vacation".

------
anigbrowl
They had no screening for incoming travelers at airports just a couple of days
ago - no health questions or temperature checks, nothing. And now a 30 day
ban? This won't solve the problem, but it will vastly exacerbate the economic
disruption.

~~~
jopsen
It won't solve the problem, but it might be big enough a move that people
realize now is the time to minimize contact as much as possible.

------
RustyRussell
Can we do better than link to the front page of a news site?

~~~
diebeforei485
Here is the official proclamation: [https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-
actions/proclamation...](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-
actions/proclamation-suspension-entry-immigrants-nonimmigrants-certain-
additional-persons-pose-risk-transmitting-2019-novel-coronavirus/)

------
mrtksn
This awfully sounds like politically motivated than medically motivated.

Edit: Apparently it’s limited to Schengen Zone:
[https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/03/11/homeland-security-
acting...](https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/03/11/homeland-security-acting-
secretary-chad-f-wolf-s-statement-presidential-proclamation)

~~~
partiallypro
How so? This will undoubtedly push the world into recession, how does that
help Trump?

~~~
mvid
Just because he can’t anticipate the repercussions doesn’t mean it wasn’t
politically motivated

~~~
allovernow
Do you really think some moron bumbled his way into the most powerful office
in the world? Have you stopped to think about how unlikely something like that
is?

You may not agree with his style (I don't) or his personality (hate it) but
the guy has to be minimally intelligent to make it as far as he has. At the
very least he knows how to work a crowd and spot opportunity.

~~~
wpietri
I think you're confusing different kinds of intelligence.

Just to lower the temperature, I'll use a non-political example. My
grandfather, long since departed, was a master salesman. He sold all sorts of
stuff door to door, including the highly dubious Kirby vacuum cleaners, before
ending up in real estate. He was an incredibly good manipulator of people, but
he was a very bad planner. He once famously sold the same piece of property to
two different people, just for the thrill of the sale. (My grandmother had to
sort it all out after.)

Being good at manipulation and bad at planning were deeply related in him and
some other scoundrels I've met. Why? Because if you don't care at all about
facts or repercussions, you can devote 100% of your attention to telling other
people what they want to hear, what they'll believe. And it works the other
way, too. If you're very good at talking your way out of problems, you never
need to learn things like being disciplined or facing facts.

So yes, it is perfectly possible that some goof bumbled his way into the most
powerful office in the world. My grandfather, thank goodness, was never very
ambitious, so he had a pretty small blast radius. I shudder to think what harm
he could have done if he had actually applied himself.

~~~
joemoon
Thank you for the anecdote. It was well written and I think it’s very
applicable to the current topic.

------
Yetanfou
I just did some back-of-the-sleeve calculations on the incidence of Corona-
infections in the US which make me wonder which continent is protected against
which by this travel ban. My source of information is the video reporting by
Dr. John Campbell [1] who thus far has been one of the more level-headed
sources on the ongoing pandemic. Here goes:

The official number of cases in the US as reported by Campbell is 1084, with
33 dead. This number roughly tallied with what I see on the CDC site (they
report 938 cases, 28 dead) [2].

The major of Seattle estimates there around 1100 infections in this city
(source: Campbell's video), a number which could grow to about 70.000 in 6
weeks (source: Campbell's video, most likely based on the spread in Wuhan)

Seattle has a population of around 750.000 people, i.e. 0.146% of the
population carries the infection.

The total population of the USA is around 328 million. 95% of the USA land
mass consists of rural area with a total population of around 60 million
(~20%), the other 80% of the population lives in metropolitan areas (source:
Wikipedia).

If the infection rate of Seattle is used as a guide for the infection rate for
the entire metropolitan population in the USA there are about 390.000 infected
people in the country at the moment. While it is unlikely that this infection
rate goes for the entire metropolitan population it is not out of the question
given the high mobility of people in the USA. Even if actual the infection
rate is a tenth of that in Seattle there are still around 38.000 infected
people in the country.

Who is being protected against whom by this travel ban?

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzXQ6Bu9JVI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzXQ6Bu9JVI)

[2] [https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-in-
us.html](https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-in-us.html)

------
wnoise
[https://twitter.com/DHS_Wolf/status/1237915985476227078](https://twitter.com/DHS_Wolf/status/1237915985476227078)

Note that this technically covers "having been in Europe in the last 14 days",
not merely "coming directly from Europe". Enforcement of the latter is much
easier, of course, and I'm sure some people will manage to sneak through by
lying or customs not asking.

Also note that it's the Schengen zone, thus excluding both UK and Ireland.

Finally, it only excludes foreign nationals. US citizens should be able to
return, but there's nothing stopping them from being tested and/or quarantined
on return.

------
forgingahead
This is late, but still necessary. But still not enough. Travel _WITHIN_ the
US must be restricted as well. Overly strict measures now can still help bend
the curve -- the economy will recover.

------
halfmatthalfcat
Seems like this is too little too late, cats already out of the bag in the US.

~~~
refurb
It's all about flattening the curve at this point.

You can do your best to identify those infected and have them self-quarantine,
but if the gates are open and infected people are streaming into your country,
you're not going to get far.

~~~
bratawurst
You’re describing the opposite of flattening the curve. Closing the gates now
does nothing.

I do not mean to be patronizing, but this is literally life or death and the
math is very simple.

Today there are _k_ infected people. Tomorrow there will be _kn_ people.

If _n_ is unsustainable, any positive value for _k_ is equivalent. Arbitrarily
large changes to _k_ today make an arbitrarily small contribution to the final
doubling.

“Infected people streaming in” means _k_ becomes _k+c_. How much does reducing
_c_ flatten the curve? How much does it increase the time span of the critical
last few doublings?

It doesn’t. That’s only dependent on _n_.

Ok, we can’t “flatten” the curve, but we can move the peak, right? How much
does reducing _c_ move the peak?

Well, every day we prevent _k_ additional people from entering buys us one
day. Remember, tomorrow that’s _kn_. Act fast.

If we could, _this week alone_ , prevent a quantity of infected Europeans
_equal to the infected population already within the US_ from entering, that
buys us one single doubling period before the collapse of healthcare. Maybe a
week if we got lucky.

I will guesstimate that that is not a realistic target in fact. The actual
benefit scales proportionally.

And next week it’s the same work for half the benefit.

What are you _talking about_.

~~~
localhost8000
What do you propose be done instead of a travel ban?

~~~
azernik
1\. Restrictions on internal travel

2\. Isolation for those exposed or showing symptoms

3\. Paid time off work for people who can't do their jobs in isolation, to
make sure people report exposure and symptoms

4\. Suspension of public gatherings

Some of these are being done voluntarily and/or by local governments, but
that's very patchy.

~~~
localhost8000
I agree on all points, but are restrictions on internal travel much different
from restrictions on external travel? Seems to depend on the definition of the
boundaries, and I think it’s hard to quantify the relative costs of
external/internal travel restrictions. So I’m not sure what we lose by also
restricting “external” travel other than another level of inconvenience.

~~~
azernik
For a country the size of the US? Yes, there is a MASSIVE difference between
the two. The volume of movement by air between California and, say, Colorado
is _massively_ larger than that between California and China, and one of those
places currently has a COVID-19 outbreak and one does not.

The distinction between the two for the sake of definitions is also very clear
- whether the restrictions apply to travel that does not cross the borders of
the United States. The currently-announced restrictions do not.

The question isn't of restricting external traffic _in addition_ to internal
traffic; we're _only_ limiting external traffic. We probably need to be doing
a bit of both, though with less draconian limitations on internal traffic to
accommodate economic realities.

------
m0zg
All those panicking on the account of economic downturn need to remember that
the US need not run faster than the bear, economically, it only needs to run
faster than the other guy. Which it will. For starters, the US has 16% of
population over the age of 65, compared to e.g. 21% in Germany, 22% in Italy
and 20% in France. Population density is much lower here. There are 2.5x ICU
beds per capita as well, and more diagnostic equipment, too. A lot fewer
people use public transport. Strong containment measures were also taken
_earlier_ in the infection cycle than e.g. in Italy.

I mean, sure there's some well publicized incompetence at CDC and FDA, that
happens, but to say that the US is _more fucked_ than e.g. continental Europe
is just not in alignment with reality.

Later this week the improved test kits should arrive en masse, and then we'll
see how bad the situation is. Right now it's just pure conjecture and panic.

------
rwcarlsen
I am beginning to strongly suspect that supply chain disruption caused by
government decisions is going to cause way more damage to the world than this
virus ever could have on its own. I think more people making these decisions
could benefit from a good deep reading of Adam Smith's "The Wealth of
Nations".

~~~
CydeWeys
Don't underestimate how costly it is to society to have a bunch of people die.
Not taking this seriously will kill a lot more people than taking it
seriously.

~~~
logicchains
The worst case of the virus is around 2% of people die, mostly elderly. The
worst case of "taking it seriously" is an economic collapse in which a double-
digit percentage of people die because global supply chains have fallen apart
and there is no longer enough food to feed everybody.

------
ablekh
Unfortunately, too little, too late, indeed. Too late for obvious reasons -
handling a crisis in a reactive way and with a serious delay is levels of
magnitude more difficult than to prevent one in the first place. Too little,
because IMO travel restrictions should have been set up much earlier and, more
importantly, much wider than China and Europe (i.e., Schengen Area - BTW,
excluding UK is ridiculous: viruses don't care about politics, do they?). By
the time people realized all seriousness of the situation, there have been
100s and even 1000s of known cases in countries like Japan and South Korea. As
far as I know, travel from those areas has not been restricted at the time. I
certainly understand that all that implies a huge global economic and mobility
impact. However, I believe that people's health and well-being is incomparably
much more important than any potential economic, lifestyle and other adverse
effects from making such hard decisions. Having enough information, advice and
warnings from health professionals and scientists at the time, _not limiting_
international travel (as the very major channel of this viral transmission)
_early enough_ and _comprehensively enough_ is extremely irresponsible,
whereas doing so would have been an act of true leadership.

------
NotZachari
I see loads of people saying that we're beyond containment, and they're
correct. However, it does slow infection rates to some degree. That allows us
the time to try to learn more about how it behaves, how repeated cases impact
people who aren't currently affected as much, and find ways to combat it.
That's a positive.

------
starpilot
Does this mean with a round trip, you could be allowed to fly to Europe and be
trapped there?

Edit: apparently not, looks like it just applies to foreign nationals
[https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/03/11/homeland-security-
acting...](https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/03/11/homeland-security-acting-
secretary-chad-f-wolf-s-statement-presidential-proclamation)

~~~
predakanga
In my experience, airports have been pretty good about checking for potential
issues like that and warning passengers at check-in.

That experience doesn't include American airports though, so YMMV.

------
cj
I see in some places it says this includes cargo / shipping. Is that true?

~~~
scottLobster
Watched the broadcast live, yes it includes cargo shipments. Something tells
me the markets are going to react badly to that one

~~~
wpietri
Including cargo doesn't make much sense to me. Did they include a
justification for this?

In contrast, the CDC's take is that "in general, because of poor survivability
of these coronaviruses on surfaces, there is likely very low risk of spread
from products or packaging that are shipped over a period of days or weeks at
ambient temperatures." \--
[https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/faq.html](https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/faq.html)

~~~
scottLobster
Broadcast didn't give any rationale, maybe they're concerned about the ship
crews being carriers?

------
jungletime
Joe Rogan has a guess on his podcast recently that is an expert. This virus
spreads through air very easily. Huge numbers of the virus develop in the
throat before symptoms appear. A person sitting at the front of the bus, can
infect people many rows back.

The takeaway. Avoid all crowded places. Buses, Stores, Metro. And places that
recirculate air, such as cruise ships, airplanes.

It will come like a wave, many many people will get infected at once, quickly.
1-3% will die. Eventually virus will run out of people not already immune to
it, and the spread will subside.

------
gravelc
Too little, too late.

Most of Australia's external cases seem to be coming from the US (e.g. Tom
Hanks and Rita Wilson), which indicates tens of thousands of undiagnosed
incidences there (even accounting for selection bias).

Urgent social distancing seems to be the best approach to maintaining a
functional health system now.

------
wdb
Why is the U.K. not included? This is so weird; it's such a mess in the UK
too.

~~~
Reason077
Excluding the UK hints that this is, at least in part, politically motivated.
In terms of risk the UK is no different to other European countries. We are
certainly not immune to coronavirus, and there are currently no restrictions
on travel between the UK and the continent.

~~~
true_religion
There are many more flights terminating in the UK than any other European
country. Plus, American students studying abroad in the UK have yet to return
home.

~~~
Reason077
These seem like arguments _for_ including the UK in the flight ban.

------
floetic
Wouldn't that make UK the next hotspot? People will travel to and from UK to
get to USA. Unless UK restricts travel from the rest of Europe.

~~~
danso
Not that this ban makes a lot of sense, but not including the UK makes even
less sense, considering they've already reported 400 cases (compared to the
~1,200 in the U.S.)

edit: to be fair, maybe the administration would've preferred to just ban
travel from Italy. But I'm guessing it's not possible to restrict travel from
just one member of the EU.

~~~
johannes1234321
Also doesn't make considering that Heathrow is a major hub for Europeans to
travel to Europe.

Only reasoning I can see is political - UK did Brexit. For limiting the
spreading this seems like a weird exception.

------
breakyerself
Closing the gate after the cows have already gotten out.

~~~
bdcravens
More like closing the gate so the coyotes don't keep attacking your cows.

~~~
ceejayoz
Except there are already dozens of coyotes inside the fence.

~~~
creddit
If you had to fight 5 coyotes or 10, which would you choose?

~~~
ceejayoz
There's every reason to believe the number of coyotes is similar on both sides
of the fence.

~~~
HenryKissinger
Still not a reason to let more coyotes in.

------
logfromblammo
Containment has already failed. That's why COVID-19 was declared pandemic.

Governments, and their public health employees in particular, should be
switching to management, mitigation, triage, and treatment now. The assumption
is that everybody will get it. The goal now is to ensure that a person
occupying an ICU beds will be treated and recovered by the time the next
patient needs to be admitted into it.

Issuing more extensive travel bans now are driving in the rear-view mirror
instead of keeping eyes on the road ahead. It's already _here_ , and spreading
in the community.

First priority is viable testing. You can't manage what you can't detect.

Then it's like controlling a nuclear chain reaction with irregularly-shaped
fuel in a randomly-configured reactor. You want to eventually consume all the
dangerously radioactive fuel, but you don't want a runaway reaction and core
meltdown either. So you stick control rods and moderator fluids and neutron
reflectors in as needed to control the rate of the reaction, based on your
monitoring, and just keep doing it until all the unreacted fuel is gone. And
the whole time, people are dropping dead from the radiation. But then the
reaction finally burns itself out, and you can breathe easy again, then
reflect upon your failures to revise your plans for the next one.

The federal response has already failed. Now is the time for lots of smart
people, who can adapt quickly, to implement ad hoc measures at the local
level, based on local conditions, and draw on their public health emergency
budgets, that hopefully weren't cut or raided already, and their preparedness
efforts, that hopefully actually exist.

------
bigmattystyles
Honest question, is the government allowed to prevent US citizens from
returning to the US?

~~~
cddotdotslash
No, and they're not. It applies to foreign nationals (i.e. non citizens). They
can, however, enforce a quarantine when citizen returns.

------
nikolay
Kinda useless as people can fly to Mexico sneak in thru San Diego. I can't
believe in 2020 we still don't have a simple and effective reusable
respirator, which evaporates all aerosols and turns them into safe to breathe
vapors. I also think the ban now is good, but 30 days will not be enough as
things are exponentially getting worse. Even if we reach the infliction point,
this is not gonna end in 30, 60, or even 90 days.

------
Jommi
The link should be changed to: [https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/03/11/homeland-
security-acting...](https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/03/11/homeland-security-
acting-secretary-chad-f-wolf-s-statement-presidential-proclamation)

..for official government info, and not a speech by an orange dude or news
sites hungry for clicks.

------
ranieuwe
Official proclamation here [https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-
actions/proclamation...](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-
actions/proclamation-suspension-entry-immigrants-nonimmigrants-certain-
additional-persons-pose-risk-transmitting-2019-novel-coronavirus/)

------
627467
unpopular opinion: personally I'm not optimistic that any good lesson will
come out of covid19 outbreak.

every recent viral outbreak seem to have generated more and more overreaction
that will not only seriously bring in the economic crash that so many have
been asking for but also generate resistance to actually serious future
outbreaks.

------
surds
India has suspended all casual travel (based on type of visa) to India from
all countries.

One of the latest positive cases was an individual who traveled from USA. He
might now have spread it to a cab driver, his family and now their circles
(school, offices) have possible exposure. :/

Given that he is one of the people who was not tested in the USA, and he has
to be isolated here now, how many people like him might be spreading it far
and wide in the USA? :(

------
nalllar
hey mods, the link should be changed to the white house proclamation, news
sites are having some trouble with accuracy.

[https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-
actions/proclamation...](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-
actions/proclamation-suspension-entry-immigrants-nonimmigrants-certain-
additional-persons-pose-risk-transmitting-2019-novel-coronavirus/)

------
JDiculous
This is insane. What are the chances of this happening for Asia? I'm currently
in Asia and it would be unfortunate to not be able to return home.

~~~
wheelerwj
We're okay for now. Im in SE asia and i think im in an okay place to wait
things out if necessary.

I don't see them restricting the rest of asia specifically unless they close
it ALL down.

~~~
freeplay
I could see them closing the borders completely if things continue to
progress.

------
elbasti
What's the endgame for the pandemic? Assume all governments act more-or-less
correctly; people self quarantine, companies switch to remote work, etc. When
does the world get back to normal? In two years after a vaccine is developed?
This summer? Ever?

~~~
Mountain_Skies
If it doesn't have the power to re-infect (which isn't known yet), then once
herd immunity is achieved, things should return somewhat to normal.

------
sanguy
The UK exemption is logical. The UK immigration systems are linked and
accessible by the US. This is why the trusted-traveller program could be
extended to cover the UK with an additional registration.

So the US immigration side knows all details of people connecting via the UK
to the US so their pre-screening is effective. This includes how they got to
the UK.

------
supernova87a
From what I read in WSJ, it's not a ban on travel by anyone, only on Europeans
(whatever that comes to be defined as). Anyone found any more clarification?
In one case that might mean the cessation of flights altogether, in the other
case some flights still might fly?

~~~
Jommi
[https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/03/11/homeland-security-
acting...](https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/03/11/homeland-security-acting-
secretary-chad-f-wolf-s-statement-presidential-proclamation)

------
jmull
(In the USA) Is this going to accomplish anything?

The virus is already here and has been spreading out-of-control for quite a
while now. The only reason the numbers are still so low here is the incredibly
low number of tests being done.

~~~
hcarvalhoalves
It stops new vectors. At this point the world is not trying to stop it
spreading anymore, but slowing the rate of spread to not overwhelm healthcare.

~~~
ska
Is external travel a significant input of new vectors compared to internal
travel?

~~~
hcarvalhoalves
It certainly helps, it’s easier to control, and has a smaller impact on most
people’s lives so more easily accepted. It’s not the most effective but other
factors have to be considered, including social unrest. It seems a sensible
decision IMO

~~~
Barrin92
>it certainly helps, it’s easier to control, and has a smaller impact on most
people’s lives

it has quite a lot of significant costs, in particular on the airline industry
and business travel which is smaller in number but pretty important. And given
that community spread is going to be a far bigger issue this ban is
nonsensical.

~~~
kelnos
Seems like many companies are already curtailing or banning business travel
(especially international), so this might not be _too_ much of a change.

------
peter303
It was refreshing in Feb to visit a National Park without have 5 Chinese buses
pull along side you.

~~~
rtkaratekid
Sorry I just had a good laugh at this. Pretty dark humor in these times... but
that just sounds great.

------
jupp0r
Does anybody know how temporary work visas are handled? I’m on an L1-B and
thankfully rebooked my flights 2 weeks ago when in a business trip to Germany
(in anticipation of something like this).

Edit: I’m back in the US with my wife and kids, wasn’t clear enough above.

------
samuelfekete
People from the UK who have holidays planned in the US would be better of with
the UK being included in the ban, because they would then be able to get
refunds for their flights etc.

------
actionowl
Why is none of this mentioned on travel.state.gov ?

Is none of this official yet?

------
akmarinov
All travel to Europe’s Schengen area according to Homeland’s announcement.

You can still fly from the UK, Romania, Bulgaria and Croatia.

------
leemailll
This might hit those airlines the greatest, we might see some of them file for
bankruptcy besides flybe

------
acoderhasnoname
How is this going to help? They can get in from Africa, Canada, Mexico, India?
Ban them all later???

~~~
tempestn
The ban is on those who have traveled to Europe in the past 14 days.

------
markvdb
Unilateral amateurism is not how things should be done.

Look at Singapore for how things _should_ be done.

------
justinzollars
My brother is stuck in Europe

~~~
jjice
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22552902](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22552902)

~~~
justinzollars
Thanks - though I think they added a 14 day period that he will need to self
quarentine

------
xwdv
I know people will try to come up with all sorts of edge cases to figure out
how to get from Europe to the US, but the fact is if you lie about where
you’ve been you will likely end up in federal prison. Don’t try it, wait 30
days.

------
starpilot
Chances of Europe reciprocating?

~~~
vnchr
Like a, “You can’t fire me because I quit,” situation?

~~~
starpilot
This is an evil generation. I see it in their eyes.

------
samstave
How many stocks (and which) did the Trump-Kushner Crime family have time to
short in prep for this?

------
joaomacp
The UK exception seems weird. Is Trump really playing geopolitical / diplomacy
games in this situation?

------
Scoundreller
From the NYT article:

"He [Trump] said he would instruct the Treasury Department to “defer tax
payments without interest or penalties for certain individuals and businesses
negatively impacted.”

Why deferments for businesses? Don't they only pay tax on profits?

~~~
Mountain_Skies
Probably is targeted more at small businesses who might have trouble getting
all of their bookkeeping and records in order in time to file in a few weeks.
If this somehow benefits large corporations, they will no doubt take full
advantage of the situation.

------
moosey
I feel like there are some particular cultural attributes in the United States
that make this useless at this point.

The United States has a very individualistic attitude. Sure, we can pause
travel from Europe, but the current administration is very anti-europe. Can we
pause travel in the US? I strongly doubt that we can effectively given the
strong anti-expertise attitudes as well.

My guess is that the United States will become a more major hot spot for the
virus than other locales. It will spread rapidly and the supply hoarding and
sad state of our medical system will mean that in a few months, other nations
will be rejecting flights from the US.

It's a prediction, a guess, but there are aspects of our culture that just
makes it seem very likely. I'm not going to make any more predictions than the
idea that we'll have more cases per capita than any other developed nation.

It's be interesting when I'm proven incorrect over time.

~~~
dcolkitt
On the other hand, Americans have much larger and more comfortable homes than
Europeans. Americans have big garages to stockpile supplies, which means less
trips to the store. Very few people use public transportation regularly. Most
people have private back yards. Many more meals are take-out or drive-thru.
More Americans use e-commerce for shopping than Europeans.

In Europe by contrast, much more of life revolves around public spaces, like
the park, cafes, the city square, and public transport. Americans tend to
spend little time in restaurants, whereas Europeans relax and enjoy the meal,
thus increasing their exposure time.

Think of the areas in the US that seen the worst outbreaks. Seattle, the Bay
Area, New York, Boston. These are the metros, where the average resident is
least likely to live a typical middle-American lifestyle. San Francisco in
many ways is closer to Copenhagen than it is to Jacksonville.

Overall, social distancing is probably easier for Americans because our way of
life already involves a good deal of social distance to begin with.

~~~
negrit
> Americans have big garages to stockpile supplies

No they don't. No one in NYC, Boston, San Francisco, Seattle, ... have big
garages to stockpile supplies and most of the US lives in those big cities
with apartments without garages.

In the suburbs they do but that's a minority of the population.

~~~
misiti3780
That is correct, but most people dont live in cities here. As of 2010, the top
10 cities had 24MM:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_populous_cities_i...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_populous_cities_in_the_United_States_by_decade#2010)

People in the suburbs do have big garages (think long island vs manhattan)

~~~
dx034
How does a garage help? Many people living in urban areas in Europe have a
basement. And even those who don't shouldn't have issues storing 2 weeks worth
of food in their houses or apartments. Fridge space is probably the only
restriction for that.

------
himalayan_yak
Trying hard not to be political. But POTUS speech seems to make things lot
worse than better along anything.

The efficacy of this travel ban is questionable (given all these exceptions
such as one for UK. Can people coming from other parts just have a layover in
UK and be get permission to enter the US?). But lets give them the benefit of
the doubt and assume that they did so in good faith.

It is what's not in the speech that was very very concerning. \- No mention of
how / when / if people can get tested. \- No mention of any plan to handle the
economic situation. What happens when businesses in Tourism and restaurants
run out of their runway and have to layoff people? What happens to hourly
workers who get sick? \- No assurance to encourage undocumented residents to
go for testing if they experience symptoms. \- No mention of large public
events. Many local governments and private organizations are doing so in an
ad-hoc ways. A consistent voice would literally save lives here.

Their team seems to be singularly focused on 'winning the narrative' or
'spinning' properly than anything else... Well, I guess this is just my
opinion.

~~~
dx034
> Can people coming from other parts just have a layover in UK and be get
> permission to enter the US?

I believe anyone who's been to the Schengen Area in the past x days faces the
ban. Excluding the UK and Ireland surely had political reasons (the UK now
also has >400 cases) but it's hard to define Europe if you don't use either
Schengen or EU (both of which the UK isn't a part of).

~~~
Symbiote
I wonder about British/Irish people.

Passports for EU citizens aren't stamped anywhere in the EU. I live in
Denmark. Would the USA know if I flew to the UK, then the USA?

(I don't intend to do this.)

~~~
squiggleblaz
> Passports for EU citizens aren't stamped anywhere in the EU. I live in
> Denmark. Would the USA know if I flew to the UK, then the USA?

This kind of question is a weird one to me. It's like "oh, marijuana
prohibition hasn't worked so we should tax it and regulated it".

If you're breaking the law, there's sanctions. You may or may not get caught,
and you may or may not be penalised, but that imperfection doesn't decide if
it's valid or not. The jails in every country have murderers in them, but
murder has been illegal since time immemorial. No-one proposes that we allow
murder because with the prohibition we simply wind up with people in prison.

And there's a big difference between free movement of people versus a limited
funnel of people. If it's still early enough, that could make the difference
between something that is containable and something that is not, and it might
make the difference between ICUs that can cope with the peak and being
completely overwhelmed. (However, I think the horse has already bolted on this
one.)

~~~
DyslexicAtheist
it's a legit question which is the pillar of (software) security thinking.
It's called _parallel_ or _adversarial thinking_
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_thinking](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_thinking)

what would work in that case is take the Channel Tunnel to England, then lie
about how long you've stayed in the UK. It probably wouldn't work if you have
taken a flight out/in the EU in the past months as that would show up to any
customs official.

------
lordlic
The payroll tax holiday idea is bonkers. The people most in need of help here
are hourly or gig workers who are told to stay home from work or who get sick
and can't work. Paying less taxes on nonexistent wages doesn't help. It seems
like the administration is more interested in propping up the markets than
actually addressing the health crisis and its human costs.

Also, eliminating copays on coronavirus treatment is nice, but it's hard not
to notice the glaring omission of anything to help the 9% of Americans who are
uninsured.

~~~
unlinked_dll
Also, do they mean SS and Medicare contributions in the payroll taxes, or just
unemployment insurance?

Like if we have a health crisis that disproportionately affects people who
rely on Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security, taking away funding for it
isn't bonkers. It's batshit insane! We should be doubling, tripling taxes in
the short term on those that can pay it to make up the funding gap for
testing, treatment, and surge capacity. And who better than the largest
medical provider in the country, with contacts and infrastructure for
directing funds to every medical provider in the country?

Are they going to cut off the water to the block when the house is burning
down?

~~~
tdhoot
> It's batshit insane! We should be doubling, tripling taxes in the short term
> on those that can pay it to make up the funding gap for testing, treatment,
> and surge capacity

Taking money out of the economy by dramatically hiking taxes at this point
seems _batshit insane_ to me. The government should be well equipped to absorb
temporary shocks to revenue.

~~~
henrikschroder
> The government should be well equipped to absorb temporary shocks to
> revenue.

Good thing the federal deficit is higher than it's ever been! No, wait,
crap...

------
jackson1way
Just de-boarded and re-boarded an aircraft going to Europe from NY because of
this „small“ missing „detail“ in the initial announcement. 4h delay and the
people who de-boarded the plane initially, are not re-boarding because they
probably left the airport by now, not knowing they had wrong information.
Ouch.

~~~
miked85
The most important detail that was missed, it seems, is that this doesn't go
into effect until midnight on Friday 03/13.

~~~
chvid
The president says that clearly in his address.

However the stuff about cargo being included is really odd. As if he was
freestyling rather than reading.

Other than that; I fail to see the point of this. There is already community
spread in the US and the UK. The ban seems arbitrary and politicized.

~~~
toyg
> As if he was freestyling rather than reading.

Or as if he had problems reading, which we know he likely has.

------
amiga_500
Let me just explain this to my broker, see if they will unwind after my stops
hit...

~~~
thedance
Stonks already hit the downside circuit breakers.

~~~
scurvy
Not sure what you're looking at, but the S&P500 e-mini futures are still
trading. No breakers were hit.

~~~
vanattab
He is referring to the other day when trading was stop for 15 mins

~~~
arthurcolle
No I don't think so. See this other poster's comment, 15 minutes after yours
(synchronicity!)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22553350](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22553350)

------
brrrrr1
that’s right - don't ban the uk where many people have traveled from italy and
the rest of the world unhindered. because the virus cares about politics and
trump’s shenanigans. folks in the us - i really hope everyone poor and rich
gets treatment when necessary, for free.

------
marknadal
Does this mean return flights too?

Or just travel originating from Europe and going inbound to USA?

------
Pusha_Drugz
Couldnt you just travel to Canada and get to U.S through there? I get that it
will reduce the number of people somewhat but it might

------
Causality1
Is there a point to this? The virus is already everywhere.

~~~
anigbrowl
Depends on how imaginative/paranoid you are. It sure seems odd that this week
has included an oil price war between Saudi Arabia and Russia, a pandemic
declaration, and now the biggest disruption of international travel/commerce
since WW2.
[https://twitter.com/RusEmbUSA/status/1237048071223160833](https://twitter.com/RusEmbUSA/status/1237048071223160833)

~~~
lowdose
If I would have my tin foiled hat on I would say something else is going.

------
blackrock
He’s dead Jim.

Captain, it appears the containment has failed. What are your next orders?

------
o_p
What if.. You travel to UK by land and take a plane to the USA?

~~~
fluxem
How are you planning to travel to UK by land? It's an island!

~~~
corel_
You can walk from France to the UK through the Chunnel, technically.

~~~
Reason077
Yes, its dangerous and illegal but it's been done!

[https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/22/sudanese-
ref...](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/22/sudanese-refugee-
walked-through-channel-tunnel-pleads-guilty-abdul-haroun)

