5 ms·

"ICE and CBP, claim the power to search both people who are arriving and departing the U.S. under that authority" Yes. There are pilot programs at land border

"ICE and CBP, claim the power to search both people who are arriving and departing the U.S. under that authority" Yes. There are pilot programs at land borders requiring US citizens to submit to exit interviews and obtain permission to leave the country East Berlin-style. Searches on departure are being stepped up every year. Recently in Atlanta the border cops were stopping everyone in the jetway boarding my international flight for an exit interview and search. They appeared to be looking for money and drugs and asked all of us in plain view to account for exactly how much cash we were carrying before we could be allowed to board. Since the place I was going and Atlanta are both known for petty robbery, I obviously didn't want to answer; the amount I was carrying was under the legal limit but enough to be worth stealing. The border cop was obviously annoyed and insisted on me saying the amount in front of everyone. As long as police agency budgets shoot skyward and Americans are happy to submit to authorities, the sky's the limit.

mikeash 11y ago
Source on that "permission to leave the country" thing? I've never heard anything like it.
- WildUtah 11y ago
  http://www.dhs.gov/news/2013/09/26/written-testimony-cbp-and-ice-house-homeland-security-subcommittee-border-and http://www.dhs.gov/news/2013/09/26/written-testimony-cbp-and... The CBP is cooperating with Canada to exchange information at border posts in real time about whom to permit to enter or leave over land borders and pressuring Mexico to join. Tracking is already in place. Secret prohibition on leaving by air is already in place for selected persons.
  - mikeash 11y ago
    That's all about tracking when visitors exit in order to find out who has stayed longer that they're allowed to, nothing about preventing US citizens from leaving. Unless I missed the pertinent bit? In which case, could you point it out?
    - schoen 11y ago
      I also looked at that testimony and it doesn't seem like the agreement proposes to prevent people from exiting. The U.S. government seems to generally support UDHR article 13(2) ("Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country") and ICCPR article 12(2) ("Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own"). The no-fly list definitely can be a serious problem for this, although people on it often can leave by boat or overland -- though they might have trouble getting the money or necessary visas to do so.
      - mikeash 11y ago
        When it comes to people overstaying their visas, I think the government wants them to leave. But they get barred from coming back, so the government wants to know about it, and they also want to track people leaving on time so they can know who's staying too long and hasn't left yet.
        schoen 11y ago
        It seems like the government's willingness to spend money or create inconveniences in order to learn more about overstays has been pretty limited, and also that they care a lot more about overstays from poor countries than from rich countries. (I think some people in Congress are really upset about it, but it just doesn't look like the immigration authorities cares that much compared to the controls at the borders and ports of entry.) Also, some incidents of investigating and attempting to deport overstays who were deeply integrated into communities and clearly doing super-productive things have led to bad PR for immigration authorities, which could be another reason those authorities are incentivized not to get too good at it (though influenced by factors like what part of the country, where the people have migrated from, what their socioeconomic status is, and others).
- MaysonL 11y ago
  See "no-fly list" for removal of permission.
  - mikeash 11y ago
    That permission can be removed doesn't mean permission has to be obtained. There are procedures whereby I can be put in jail, removing my permission to leave the room where I've been forcibly relocated. But that doesn't mean I have to "obtain permission to leave the room" right now. The no-fly list is utterly reprehensible, but it doesn't match what was said.

mikeash 11y ago

Source on that "permission to leave the country" thing? I've never heard anything like it.

WildUtah 11y ago
http://www.dhs.gov/news/2013/09/26/written-testimony-cbp-and-ice-house-homeland-security-subcommittee-border-and http://www.dhs.gov/news/2013/09/26/written-testimony-cbp-and... The CBP is cooperating with Canada to exchange information at border posts in real time about whom to permit to enter or leave over land borders and pressuring Mexico to join. Tracking is already in place. Secret prohibition on leaving by air is already in place for selected persons.
- mikeash 11y ago
  That's all about tracking when visitors exit in order to find out who has stayed longer that they're allowed to, nothing about preventing US citizens from leaving. Unless I missed the pertinent bit? In which case, could you point it out?
  - schoen 11y ago
    I also looked at that testimony and it doesn't seem like the agreement proposes to prevent people from exiting. The U.S. government seems to generally support UDHR article 13(2) ("Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country") and ICCPR article 12(2) ("Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own"). The no-fly list definitely can be a serious problem for this, although people on it often can leave by boat or overland -- though they might have trouble getting the money or necessary visas to do so.
    - mikeash 11y ago
      When it comes to people overstaying their visas, I think the government wants them to leave. But they get barred from coming back, so the government wants to know about it, and they also want to track people leaving on time so they can know who's staying too long and hasn't left yet.
      - schoen 11y ago
        It seems like the government's willingness to spend money or create inconveniences in order to learn more about overstays has been pretty limited, and also that they care a lot more about overstays from poor countries than from rich countries. (I think some people in Congress are really upset about it, but it just doesn't look like the immigration authorities cares that much compared to the controls at the borders and ports of entry.) Also, some incidents of investigating and attempting to deport overstays who were deeply integrated into communities and clearly doing super-productive things have led to bad PR for immigration authorities, which could be another reason those authorities are incentivized not to get too good at it (though influenced by factors like what part of the country, where the people have migrated from, what their socioeconomic status is, and others).
MaysonL 11y ago
See "no-fly list" for removal of permission.
- mikeash 11y ago
  That permission can be removed doesn't mean permission has to be obtained. There are procedures whereby I can be put in jail, removing my permission to leave the room where I've been forcibly relocated. But that doesn't mean I have to "obtain permission to leave the room" right now. The no-fly list is utterly reprehensible, but it doesn't match what was said.