Equal Opportunity Expulsion?

French television reporters weren?t the only hacks blocked at LAX from entering the United States to cover the E3 gaming conference, after failing to produce the required but rarely demanded journalist visas. A British tech journalist, who didn?t want his name used, writes in:

It happened to a lot of UK visitors, too. The criteria for search and expulsion in one case appeared to be a question, asked at customs, if the visitor intended to interview someone while they were in this country. [?]

I got a relatively frantic e-mail on Monday the 12th from the editor of one of the magazines I write for ? because his reviews editor got stopped, searched, and deported from LAX within a couple of hours of his landing. I had to run off and cover E3 in his place. Another editor I know came to E3 with a friend, and that friend was deported at customs.

Immigration officials have now confirmed the handcuffing and expulsions, describing the procedures as routine. Meanwhile, public relations employees who told border guards they were here to work at E3 were whisked right through, on the Visa Waiver program that allows 90-day trips for ?business or pleasure,? but not journalism.

Comments

[joe]

Weird. I wonder if this has anything to do with the "specific warnings" that brough the security level to orange. Remember Ahmed Shah Masood.

Still, British tech reporters?

[scott]

Obviously we live in a stae of near martial law, with no real rights anymore, subject to the whim of the dictators of the police state. "Land of the Free" my big white ass...

[Matt Welch]

Joe -- The expulsions were on or near the weekend of May 10-11, which was before the latest Code turned Orange. I think this is just a case of a previously ignored regulation now being enforced, starting with the most enthusiastic border guards.

[Sparky]

If it's done by the government, you can count on it involving zero common sense. This decision to suddnely enforce the rules in this particular context obviously makes nobody safer.

[Paladin]

I find it odd that this means, "we live in a stae of near martial law, with no real rights anymore, subject to the whim of the dictators of the police state." Of course, hyperbole is often used in place of argument, but this is rather more strident than I might expect.

What it means is that some foreign nationals were turned back at the border, as is the right of any sovereign state to do. Hell, I don't even think that a reason has to be given to deny entry. I'm fairly confident that anyone here on a visa can be expelled at will as well, though there may be legal recourse there (I don't think there is any recourse for a denial of entry).

Actually, we don't know that this didn't make someone safer. If there was reliable information that a terrorist was traveling on a journalistic passport (say from France: remember the accusations of a French diplomat credentialing Iraqi nationals) then it makes sense to stop journalists from the target country and expel them. Since profiling is verboten, you have to deny everyone on such a passport in order to maintain consistency.

[Matt Welch]

Paladin -- If, as you hypotheticalized, a French terrorist was traveling with a journalist visa, then he would have had ... a journalist visa (the expelled journalists did not). If he wanted to come in without trouble, the *last* thing he would have done is claim to be a journalist, since working journalists are singled out as being exempt from the Visa Waiver Program. You're right -- this whole thing was perfectly legal. But it's actually quite hard to imagine how this could have made anyone safer, while it's pretty easy to see how this has done tangible (if ultimately minor) damage to the E3 conference, to the L.A. Convention Center, to the journalists themselves, and potentially to Americans seeking to travel and/or do journalism abroad.

[tonio-k]

what the heck are you talking about, Andy?

the haphazard, random, ad-hoc enforcement of the rules is moronic, to be sure, but what's this "free-speech" bullshit you're spouting? "vetting " journalists? huh?

don't get it.

[glenn]

What do you expect? The INS had tons of rules that were haphazardly enforced. Now the DCIS or whatever-the-fuck-they-are-this-week is enforcing a different batch of them.

[Andy]

Paladin - the US does have every right to turn away foreign nationals, in fact I would expect every country to reserve that right.

I could understand, although I disagree strongly with, the idea of rejecting French journalists due to the war issue; but turning away journalists from your strongest ally is idiocy! It demonstrates the US doesn't trust anybody.

What does the US have to hide if it insists on vetting every journalist prior to entry? This is supposed to be the country of free speech isn't it.

Andy

[Andy]

Tonio - I was referring to the fact that in the eyes of US immigration 'business' is not 'journalism' when it patently is a subset of it if you look at the media industry.

Therefore, if business is allowed without qualification but 'journalism' is restricted I can only surmise the reason is the nature of the business of journalism, ie information. Hence the reference to free speech.

Andy

[Andrew]

Why are working journalists "exempt from the Visa Waiver Program"? Do we have something to hide?

By the way, I got here via a story about the same thing happening to an Australian journalist...

http://www.laobserved.com/archive/000967.html

[great]

Hotels plus Tours, New York Hotel Reservations :: Europe Hotels, Budget Accommodation in Europe :: Euro Asia Hotels, Discount Accommodation and Vacation Rentals :: Discount Hotel Reservations and Vacation Guides :: Where the Traveller goes, free travel guide :: Asian Hotels Guide, hotel reservations :: East Asia Hotel Reservations