
French historian Henry Rousso held for 10 hours and threatened with deportation - cylinder
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/02/26/us/french-historian-detained-immigration-henry-rousso.html
======
prymitive
I wonder if those stories that started appearing in the media since the Trump
ban order are really showing a true change in US border control actions, or
are they just a hot topic so both travelers and media are more eager to report
on that. It is likely that those kind of detentions were happening for years,
but they didn't got much news coverage. After all if you don't like Trumps
policies you will happily read about related stories as it confirms what you
already believe in.

Googling for some data yields some results, but those seem to be big
immigration numbers, rather than incidental short detentions for random
travelers, so it's hard for me to draw any conclusion. Examples:
[http://cmsny.org/immigration-detention-behind-the-record-
num...](http://cmsny.org/immigration-detention-behind-the-record-numbers/)
[https://www.ice.gov/removal-statistics/2016](https://www.ice.gov/removal-
statistics/2016)

I think it's best to not get carried away just because a few people got
detained. It seems a bit too little to call it policy shift for border control
officers, at least as long it stays just incidental issue. FUD is always quick
to spread and hard to fight against.

~~~
justin66
If the stories of deplorable and pointless detentions are true, and there are
no concomitant stories of terrorists being stopped at the border or whatever
(something one assumes the government would be highly motivated to report),
does it actually matter that the stories were under-reported previously in the
press? The important thing is that the issue gets attention and is resolved.

~~~
mattnewton
This^

I don't care if it was done under Obama too, it doesn't bless it and shouldn't
make it okay with liberals.

Trump is still worthy of criticism by association because of his immigration
policies clearly back this kind of behavior. And Obama is too if he condoned
this.

------
dmode
This is absolutely not the norm. If this thing was resolved in a 20 mins after
the mix-up we could agree. But 10 hrs for a business visa is not the norm. As
someone who has traveled at least 50 times in pre-Trump era on immigration
purposes, I have extensive experience with border agents. In fact, once coming
back from my trip to Mexico, I had forgotten to get my I-20 stamped from my
school. The border agents where phenomenal to deal with this, they produced a
new I-20 with current dates and requested me to get it stamped with my school
in the next 48 hrs and fax USCIS a copy. This was done within an hour. I
shudder to think what will happen with a situation like this today.

~~~
stevenjgarner
I disagree, and I too have extensive experience over many decades with border
agents. I have both a Permanent Resident "green" card and a Global Entry card,
yet 4 times in the past 12 months (and many times prior) I was extracted for
Secondary Processing at the border, held waiting for hours without being
allowed to use my cell phone, missing my connecting flights yet ultimately
admitted into the U.S.. Every time it costs the U.S. tax payer an unnecessary
fortune (I have Global Entry! - which itself took many many hours and dozens
of pieces of paper and extreme vetting). The last time I was allowed directly
into the U.S. without Secondary Processing was in the 90's. I don't find his
story at all unusual.

------
legostormtroopr
So an academic came on a tourist visa, but was giving a talk related to his
work and accepting money. Under US visa rules this is allowed, but is not
being classified as "work", so a tourist visa is sufficient.

Except the Agent (who has probably never met an academic) didn't realise this
and incorrectly (although understandably) concluded that the Mr. Rousso was
working while on a tourist visa. Especially since Mr. Roussos speaking fee is
probably the equivalent of a few days work for the customs agent

This is probably a simple mix-up that escalated because of a clash of cultures
(both national and educational).

~~~
justin66
> This is probably a simple mix-up that escalated because of a clash of
> cultures (both national and educational).

Twenty minutes would be indicative of a simple mix-up. 10 hours is honestly
just kind of strange (think of how many people in the escalation process
didn't understand the rules or didn't care) and IMO indicates a pretty serious
problem.

------
tomlock
Even as an American citizen but an Australian resident - these stories make me
afraid to travel to the US. Might the border agents find me to be unacceptably
foreign?

~~~
hubert123
There were plenty of other reasons to be afraid before, the random gun crime,
police state, lack of healthcare and the TSA cancer machines / groping being
the main ones. Being legally disinvited is only a fear if it's financially a
hit to have to fly back from their airport.

~~~
tbihl
Was it really worth watering down a list of worthwhile fears with absurd
sensationalism, just to make it longer?

The risk of death in a vehicle far exceeds that of gun violence. If you're
talking about injuries perpetrated by a stranger, that disparity grows more
yet.

The lack of healthcare doesn't exist, though you'll certainly have to pay up.
But really, 'lack'? If you find yourself injured, you can probably look up and
find a billboard for a hospital (see the previous point on how you're likely
to get hurt.) And there will almost certainly be first rate care at said
hospital.

And most egregiously, 'cancer machines'? Are you referring to the backscatter
x-rays, which deliver a smaller dose than a single banana? Or the millimeter
wave machines, which operate at low intensity, and actually deliver no dose of
ionizing radiation whatsoever, due to operating at a wavelength with photon
energies measured in MILLI-eV? Why not plan your travels around local geology
and only travel by boat? Because if you think you're sensitive to millimeter
waves, you're really going to be upset at the gammas coming from ground
sources, as well as the ones hitting you when you're not underneath those
final 7km of sweet, sweet radiation-attenuating atmosphere.

There are valid reasons not to travel to the US, even in your own post. Why
bury them under such nonsense?

~~~
hackuser
> The risk of death in a vehicle far exceeds that of gun violence.

Per the CDC:

* Motor vehicle traffic deaths: 33,804

* Firearm deaths: 33,736

[https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm)

> If you're talking about injuries perpetrated by a stranger, that disparity
> grows more yet.

I'm not sure where to find this data, but it seems likely to me that most
motor vehicle deaths are self-inflicted (if not intentionally). Of course,
because motor vehicle deaths are much more often due to accident than
intention, I suspect strangers are more commonly involved (the person who
shoots you has a good chance of being someone who knows and dislikes you).

------
fixxer
While I'm sure many will jump on this as a symptom of the current political
climate, I'm more inclined to trust the statement from border control
regarding an inexperienced agent. Everybody chill.

For a foreign scholar performing a substantial lecture (like teaching a
course), a J-1 visa is required. For a simple conference presentation, you
should absolutely be able to get by on a B visa. Some new guy got confused.
¯\\_(ツ)_/¯

Before Trump took office, customs was a pain in the ass for _citizens_ of this
country. It will continue to be a pain in the ass for a long, long time.

~~~
outworlder
You mean, you don't find anything wrong with that fact that someone was
detained for 10 hours, due to a single, "inexperience" agent? And he was a
well-connected individual. Others would likely endure far worse.

~~~
fixxer
I found it wrong when it happened before Trump. I continue to find it wrong.
This is one of the main reasons I like small government. They tend to do a
shitty job.

~~~
yjftsjthsd-h
> This is one of the main reasons I like small government. They tend to do a
> shitty job.

Sorry, this doesn't parse for me. Why is that desirable?

~~~
fixxer
Have you found large institutions to be more responsible and efficient? I have
not. I have found the opposite.

Large orgs always have stories like this. Management and accountability are
hard to scale and the problem is as true for the private sector as it is for
public.

Customs is a straw man for the argument at large, but nevertheless the
statement works: I prefer small government because I've seen the collassal
fuckups they are capable of at scale.

(My favorite government entity is the USGS)

@fictioncircle: no reply available, so I'll address your question here: no, we
should not ban large business. We should provide basic structure to support
competition. Since government is not something we can frame competitively (we
can't pick which government to use once one is established without substantial
"frictions"), we should just keep them small and out of the way.

~~~
justin66
The notion that regions where government is poorly funded or barely present
perform _better_ in terms of due process is so counterfactual that it's hard
to know what to say about it.

------
drpgq
It will be interested to see how much tourism goes down.

~~~
dhfhduk
It's already going down:

[http://www.frommers.com/tips/miscellaneous/the-travel-
press-...](http://www.frommers.com/tips/miscellaneous/the-travel-press-is-
reporting-the-trump-slump-a-devastating-drop-in-tourism-to-the-united-states)

[http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/seek-foreign-flights-
nyc...](http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/seek-foreign-flights-nyc-travel-
ban-data-suggests-article-1.2980937)

------
devoply
We need a movement to legalize borders as being under control of the legal
system of the country. We don't need barbarians running our borders that
answer to no law or the Constitution. If they have no covenant with the people
like the law or the Constitution, what right do they have to any authority. It
makes no sense that any such group of people should have all of this authority
for which they are not held to account... and can't be held to account by the
people who they are harassing and diminishing.

It's nothing more than an analogue of a protection racket.

~~~
jdoliner
Borders are under control of the legal system and policing them is a right
that's granted to the Federal government by the constitution. It makes
complete sense that the Federal government, which is elected by US citizens
would be able to policy foreigners entering the country without being held
accountable to them. That's how every country in the world works. You may not
like this system now that "the wrong people" have been elected to run the
federal government but that's the way the system works and it's incredibly
reasonable.

I can't see how you draw the analogue of to a protection racket, they're not
collecting money from anyone here.

~~~
devoply
Bullshit it's reasonable. First of all it's not only non-citizens that are
being constantly stripped of their rights, it's non-citizens and citizens
alike. Further, it often goes well beyond reasonable policing to invasive
searches into the private lives of individuals including stripping away their
rights to human dignity. It may have been reasonable 50 years ago. It's no
longer reasonable.

And it's a racket. In that they are supposedly protecting the people who they
are robbing via taxes, and they are harassing the same people. And it's more
or less security theater in that the point is the harassment and the
humiliation. Because you are in fear you are supposed to feel protected.

~~~
yjftsjthsd-h
> It may have been reasonable 50 years ago. It's no longer reasonable.

Why would it become less reasonable?

~~~
devoply
50 years ago you would have to be MLK or MX to have a whole dossier on you,
someone important, notable, or problematic. Today every citizen has a virtual
dossier on them that's a click away. The level of intrusion into private lives
is excessive and in many ways illegal according to human rights conventions
and the Constitution.

Rights routinely infringed:

Article 1 Right to Equality

Article 2 Freedom from Discrimination

Article 3 Right to Life, Liberty, Personal Security

Article 5 Freedom from Torture and Degrading Treatment

Article 9 Freedom from Arbitrary Arrest and Exile

Article 10 Right to Fair Public Hearing

Article 11 Right to be Considered Innocent until Proven Guilty

Article 12 Freedom from Interference with Privacy, Family, Home and
Correspondence

Article 13 Right to Free Movement in and out of the Country

Article 14 Right to Asylum in other Countries from Persecution

Article 18 Freedom of Belief and Religion

Article 19 Freedom of Opinion and Information

Article 26 Right to Education

Article 30 Freedom from State or Personal Interference in the above Rights

~~~
sverige
The U.N. Convention on Human Rights does not have the force of law in the
United States. While many of the rights in the list above were first codified
in the Constitution, others are not specified as rights in that document.

Of course, being natural rights, those not so enumerated are assumed to obtain
unless specifically restricted by the Constitution or federal, state, or local
law. In the U.S., the place to look for whether this or that right _not_
specifically called out in the Bill of Rights has been restricted is those
laws and the court rulings concerning those laws.

So, for example, there is no right to education in the U.S., and while the
U.S. historically has been the greatest haven for asylum seekers, that does
not mean that non-citizens have an affirmative right to enter the U.S.

The saddest part of all this is that the dossier on you and me was made
possible by people like you and me who work in the tech industry. Google and
Facebook have information on most people that the Stasi could only have
dreamed of possessing.

------
m0llusk
My understanding of Capitalism indicates this is an opportunity to improve
results by experimenting with alternatives.

~~~
aniro
Ah, yes.. profit incentive as the silver bullet for all that ails.

This myopic view is foolish and needs to die.

------
clamprecht
The real question for me is: Is this happening more than it was before, or is
it just being reported more?

~~~
maxerickson
The immigration lawyer quoted in the article doesn't waffle about it.

 _Mr. Mills said the treatment Mr. Rousso experienced was unusual, but
representative of a shift in how some border agents are approaching their
jobs.

“Now they’re looking really hard for reasons to deny, instead of reasons to
admit,” he said._

