I don't think most people who oppose these policies do so because they expect themselves to suffer from them. It's quite obvious that the US isn't going to deta

I don't think most people who oppose these policies do so because they expect themselves to suffer from them. It's quite obvious that the US isn't going to detain 100% of travellers for hours, if only because it would be prohibitively expensive. I'd say the opposition is fuelled by (a) an aversion to be in a situation where you have basically no rights, as opposed to the uniformed goons on the other side, (b) the fear that such policies are used to target others, such as journalists, thus having an impact on me even without being applied to me, and (c) solidarity with people who may be at a higher risk for reasons such as their ethnicity, political opinion etc. There are other ways these policies have a chilling effect without being applied wholesale. I have, on previous flights, chosen the halal food option just for kicks (and gotten bewildered looks when I chose a red wine for dinner). I wouldn't do so flying to the US these days. That may seem inconsequential, but I can easily see someone not sharing that anti-war article on Twitter these days, at which point the possible consequences have become quite real.