How do they justify Immigration and Customs enforcement working domestic flights and departures in general? Isn't ICE's scope supposed to be limited to what/who is coming into the country from foreign countries?
Of course, that's a rhetorical question. When you're an autocrat, you do not need to justify your actions.
At least in the large airports, the international flights come in to a separate terminal. Will ICE limit their involvement to that terminal only, and only inbound flights? Immigration and Customs have no business on the outbound side or with domestic passengers.
Some international flights arrive in to domestic US terminals. These are from a limited set of countries where passengers have cleared US immigration in the departure country.
Canada, Ireland and the UAE are the major three, plus Aruba, Barbados and Bermuda.
ICE’s scope isn’t who is coming into the country — that’s CBP’s scope. ICE’s scope is supposed to be those committing immigration offences who have already entered the country (either because the CBP failed to catch them, or because they were admitted but never left).
The only difficulty justifying this is ICE’s power to stop and question people, and an airport is no different to a random street from that point of view. Do they have probable cause? What suffices as probable cause?
And once you have probable cause, you run into the problem 8 USC 1304(e) creates: someone who doesn’t have documentation proving their legal immigration status falls into one of two categories, they’re either a citizen, or they’re an immigrant violating that section.
(And this is looking at it from a simple legalistic point of view, ignoring any questions about ICE’s behaviour or powers!)
> And once you have probable cause, you run into the problem 8 USC 1304(e) creates: someone who doesn’t have documentation proving their legal immigration status falls into one of two categories, they’re either a citizen, or they’re an immigrant violating that section.
So hopefully if you are tourist from abroad, CBP will give you stamp into your passport, otherwise you have entered "illegally". They are not always stamping passports.
CBP is doing it electronically for quite some time, as they can see your date of entry in the system and they are not controlling your date of leave against passport when you are leaving USA (you won't even meet CBP at that stage), but it is all checked electronically.
Last time I got stamped. But it seems like an exception than a rule.
A lot of countries don’t stamp passports — if you can guarantee the entry is immediately recorded in your central database, and you can reliably look up the latest entry for a given passport, a stamp doesn’t really gain much.
For all its flaws, TSA (at least under previous administrations) did a lot of design thinking work around how to streamline flows through airports, minimize travel stress and conflict, and optimize to minimize traveler complaints while continuing to maintain security.
Bringing in shock theater optimized staff is a particularly poor fit for a scenario that will impact a disproportionately voting and bipartisan pool of citizens.
There's a reason advertising in airports is generally targeted at corporate leaders and decision makers.
At the time I avoid traveling to the US and just watching eating popcorn. This summer football Mundial is going to be held and in 2028 the summer Olympics. It will the first time that a country that hosts these goes a foreigners' hostile way.
I wonder how this will impact the economy. People deciding not to travel won’t help anything. You would think this is the last thing the administration would want to do at this point.
Straight white US citizen male here. This scares the shit out of me. I travel for work all the time, but understanding that we will now have barely trained, and in many cases completely lawless, consequence-free federal officers in direct, high stress, public areas where lots of people are constantly passing through seems like an absolute recipe for tragedy.
This will 100% make me reconsider travel and avoid airports with ICE agents. I think the writing on the wall is clear, nobody is safe.
93 comments
Of course, that's a rhetorical question. When you're an autocrat, you do not need to justify your actions.
Canada, Ireland and the UAE are the major three, plus Aruba, Barbados and Bermuda.
The only difficulty justifying this is ICE’s power to stop and question people, and an airport is no different to a random street from that point of view. Do they have probable cause? What suffices as probable cause?
And once you have probable cause, you run into the problem 8 USC 1304(e) creates: someone who doesn’t have documentation proving their legal immigration status falls into one of two categories, they’re either a citizen, or they’re an immigrant violating that section.
(And this is looking at it from a simple legalistic point of view, ignoring any questions about ICE’s behaviour or powers!)
> And once you have probable cause, you run into the problem 8 USC 1304(e) creates: someone who doesn’t have documentation proving their legal immigration status falls into one of two categories, they’re either a citizen, or they’re an immigrant violating that section.
So hopefully if you are tourist from abroad, CBP will give you stamp into your passport, otherwise you have entered "illegally". They are not always stamping passports.
Under what circumstances would they not?
Last time I got stamped. But it seems like an exception than a rule.
https://www.swlaw.com/publication/immigration-alert-cbp-elim...
I can already see myself arguing with ICE officer that CBP is not stamping passport for years.
This demonstrates they see ICE as their fix all police force, and that they are willing to deploy ICE to do whatever they think needs to be done.
Coast Guard is $14B.
Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.
When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."
Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.
Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
This reichstag fire is manufactured.
Bringing in shock theater optimized staff is a particularly poor fit for a scenario that will impact a disproportionately voting and bipartisan pool of citizens.
There's a reason advertising in airports is generally targeted at corporate leaders and decision makers.
"Visit the USA ... starting your holiday off wiv your papers, and a bang! Schnell !!! "
This will 100% make me reconsider travel and avoid airports with ICE agents. I think the writing on the wall is clear, nobody is safe.