Harrassment at the airport!

[TheRealCanadian]

One scenario I am not sure of what to expect is what if at the airport she said "yes" when asked if she was a citizen. Should the officer ask for documents? Would that be profiling/discrimination? I would say it is.

Not at all. It is reasonable that if an individual makes a claim to US citizenship, that the officers may take reasonable steps to validate such claim. The courts are not naiive enough to force the Border Patrol to take the person's word at face value.

If they were to check and somehow determine that she was NOT in fact a citizen, then she would be in a world of trouble by making a false claim to US citizenship. At the border it would be a permanent, non-waivable bar to re-entry. Inside the US, probably not - but certainly a serious crime.

I remain baffled as to why people are so worried about losing the GC - I have carried around a Candian citizenship certificate in my wallet for 20 years without loss. I even have my original temporary learner's permit that I got when I was 16.

 

[GreenCardVirus]

that doesn't mean that the Border Patrol must waste their time asking everyone for a GC instead of concentrating on those who are most likely to be non-citzens and not complying with the law.

It's no different than strip-searching 90 year old grandmothers in wheelchairs to prove that that security is not discriminating. It's just stupid.

It would still be illegal if we are travelling together and if they ask me if I were a citizen and not you. Assuming they asked us both, and both said yes. It would be illegal to ask me for documents and not you.

UK is contemplating to profile no-risk candidates like the 90 year old you mentioned and not pick them for frisking.

 

[hipka]

But that is equally inappropriate. The DL is not required when you are not driving. However, the GC is required when you are in the US

It shows that laws relating to DL as well as their implementation are proper. The law makes a clear statement and places a reasonable burden that people are expected to carry DL only when driving and the people who implement it stick to this and ask for DL only during driving.

In case of GC, the law on one hand is vague, because the GC cannot be in your possession always. If taken literally it means that you need to have the GC in your bathroom and you could be fined for not carrying it. So when the law is vague it is the responsibility of law enforcement officials to carry out a reasonable interpretation. This is where CBP has failed miserably as it is not reasonable to expect people to carry a GC on domestic flights.

So according to your logic, if most drivers stopped carrying the DL, it would no longer be appropriate for the Police to ask for it????

Read the argument above. DL law is pretty clear.

If you believe you have a discrimination claim, you can certainly try to raise it. The courts, on the other hand, will not agree with you. There are plenty of white indiviudals who speak English without an accent (like me) who are not citizens yet are never asked for a GC; that doesn't mean that the Border Patrol must waste their time asking everyone for a GC instead of concentrating on those who are most likely to be non-citzens and not complying with the law.
It's no different than strip-searching 90 year old grandmothers in wheelchairs to prove that that security is not discriminating. It's just stupid.

Discrimination claim won't work as the law is vague. What if someone has hidden explosives in your 90 year old grandmom, without her knowledge? Security should be fool proof and therefore it makes sense that everyone should be given similar treatment.

 

[GreenCardVirus]

I remain baffled as to why people are so worried about losing the GC -

For the same reason you dont carry a passport. GC is also a re-entry permit. Getting a replacement is not as easy as getting a replacement for a lost DL.

The one single thing I hate about US immigration system is that it puts you in a position or periods when you can't travel (meaning come back). Past 9 years or so, even though I continuousely was in proper status, there were lot of gaps in my travel ability.

Even when there was visa revalidation within the country, one had to part with the passport for 3-4 months. They used to send it in 2-3 days if you withdraw the revalidation but that is still no good for emergencies.

 

[sarrebal]

hmcis,
Welcome to the real USA. Racial hatred which was masked under good manners all these years is surfacing.

I'm sorry. This is c*rap. Any other countries, including western europe where I'm from are much more closed to racial differencies than the US.

And, first of all, he was asking everybody, not just "brown skin" people.
Second, I'd fully agree with profiling for security reason (this is not the case anyways).

 

[TheRealCanadian]

The law makes a clear statement and places a reasonable burden that people are expected to carry DL only when driving and the people who implement it stick to this and ask for DL only during driving.

You are incorrect. The law clearly and explicitly states that you must be in posession of the D/L when operating a vehicle on public roads. There is no interpretation or expectation required - the requirement is clear.

So when the law is vague it is the responsibility of law enforcement officials to carry out a reasonable interpretation. This is where CBP has failed miserably as it is not reasonable to expect people to carry a GC on domestic flights.

So says you, and unfortunately for you no court in the country will agree with you. While we have arguments about posession all the time here, if you are in an airport in El Paso while your GC is in New York then you are clearly NOT "in posession" of your GC.

Security should be fool proof and therefore it makes sense that everyone should be given similar treatment.

Not at all. If you have limited resources, you focus in on the most likely areas of concern.

 

[GreenCardVirus]

What if someone has hidden explosives in your 90 year old grandmom, without her knowledge? Security should be fool proof and therefore it makes sense that everyone should be given similar treatment.

Good point there .. next time the evil doers will specifically target 90 year olds.

US is free to chage its laws to treat people differently based on color/age. Until then it is illegal to ask me for proof of citizenship and not the next guy who could be KGB and highly skilled in North American english and accents.

Non-discrimatory laws in US are a major attraction why people want to move here.

From the democratic country I come from, law treats me differently based on religion, region, caste. For example, a Muslim can just utter 3 words and get rid of his wife while others have file in a court of law. If one is poor and belongs to a certain so called upper class, that person not has to put up with lack of money, but also lack of opportunity in education and jobs.

and we talk about discrimination and profiling here ...

my friday rants ...

 

[hipka]

You are incorrect. The law clearly and explicitly states that you must be in posession of the D/L when operating a vehicle on public roads. There is no interpretation or expectation required - the requirement is clear.

That is what I am saying, in case of the DL the law is clear in case of GC the law is vague.

So says you, and unfortunately for you no court in the country will agree with you. While we have arguments about posession all the time here, if you are in an airport in El Paso while your GC is in New York then you are clearly NOT "in posession" of your GC.

So if you go to the mall and the GC is in your house you are NOT in possession. I told you before that courts will not agree as the law is itself vague.

Not at all. If you have limited resources, you focus in on the most likely areas of concern.

The govt. has never complained about a lack of resources, also in this case the same resources(security checks) can be used on everyone!

 

[sarrebal]

Good point there .. next time the evil doers will specifically target 90 year olds.

US is free to chage its laws to treat people differently based on color/age. Until then it is illegal to ask me for proof of citizenship and not the next guy who could be KGB and highly skilled in North American english and accents.

Non-discrimatory laws in US are a major attraction why people want to move here.

The US government first priority should be to protect its citizens and residents.
Racial profiling perhaps is not a pleasant method, but unfortunately we got to that point. Look at what's happening in today's world.
IMO, everybody has the same civil and human rights. However, if your name is Mohammed or Abdul, then you should be checked at the airport. Not a racist comment here, just common sense.

 

[hipka]

The US government first priority should be to protect its citizens and residents.
Racial profiling perhaps is not a pleasant method, but unfortunately we got to that point. Look at what's happening in today's world.
IMO, everybody has the same civil and human rights. However, if your name is Mohammed or Abdul, then you should be checked at the airport. Not a racist comment here, just common sense.

Absurd logic! Almost 200 million people have the surname Mohd. What is the connection between a name and a terrorist?? If a terrorist changes his name does he become a saint?? !!

 

[TheRealCanadian]

So if you go to the mall and the GC is in your house you are NOT in possession. I told you before that courts will not agree as the law is itself vague.

I'd actually be interested in what would happen here. I would venture that you could be temporarily detained and fined, and that you would NOT be able to win that in court.

 

[sarrebal]

Absurd logic! Almost 200 million people have the surname Mohd. What is the connection between a name and a terrorist?? If a terrorist changes his name does he become a saint?? !!

Mine was just an example.
We all know that terrorism is islamic. Double-check all the islamic-looking people, even though 99.9999% of them are good people.
Profiling should be legal and allowed. Unfortunately the world changed.

 

[hipka]

From the democratic country I come from, law treats me differently based on religion, region, caste. For example, a Muslim can just utter 3 words and get rid of his wife while others have file in a court of law. If one is poor and belongs to a certain so called upper class, that person not has to put up with lack of money, but also lack of opportunity in education and jobs.
and we talk about discrimination and profiling here ...
my friday rants ...

Actually looking at US immigration laws, indian laws appear much better!

 

[hipka]

Mine was just an example.
We all know that terrorism is islamic. Double-check all the islamic-looking people, even though 99.9999% of them are good people.
Profiling should be legal and allowed. Unfortunately the world changed.

What do you mean islamic looking?? The religion is present in all continents of the world and just because you belong to it you don't have to look in a certain way!

 

[sarrebal]

From the democratic country I come from, law treats me differently based on religion, region, caste. For example, a Muslim can just utter 3 words and get rid of his wife while others have file in a court of law. If one is poor and belongs to a certain so called upper class, that person not has to put up with lack of money, but also lack of opportunity in education and jobs.

and we talk about discrimination and profiling here ...

my friday rants ...

Good point.
After all, the immigrant has an advantage. If he/she doesn't like US laws, he/she could come back to his/her country.

 

[GreenCardVirus]

The US government first priority should be to protect its citizens and residents.
Racial profiling perhaps is not a pleasant method, but unfortunately we got to that point. Look at what's happening in today's world.
IMO, everybody has the same civil and human rights. However, if your name is Mohammed or Abdul, then you should be checked at the airport. Not a racist comment here, just common sense.

Agree! Expectation of righteousness in times of turmoil is expecting a lot. If there is an act of terror in my country, I expect police to look in "certain" areas and people of "certain" religion. I know that is not correct but for the sake of security I expect the police to do it. I am sure all the black and white people of US expect the cops with suspision at "certain" color.

 

[sarrebal]

What do you mean islamic looking?? The religion is present in all continents of the world and just because you belong to it you don't have to look in a certain way!

I mean what you read. I don't feel like being "politically correct". I didn't say that the risk would be eliminated, but it would certainly be reduced.

 

[GreenCardVirus]

I mean what you read. I don't feel like being "politically correct". I didn't say that the risk would be eliminated, but it would certainly be reduced.

This topic is diverting to something not pleasant, please keep everything in perspective of immigration.

 

[sarrebal]

This topic is diverting to something not pleasant, please keep everything in perspective of immigration.

Sorry.
I just feel outraged when I read that the US is a racist country, especially from people that come from countries with basically no respect for cultural and racial diversity.

 

[harvydonald]

This topic is diverting to something not pleasant, please keep everything in perspective of immigration.

I agree...please find a different forum to express your opinions...and keep this related to life after Green Card....