7 ms·

This is nothing to be upset about or newsworthy. This probably happens every day. He got rejected because he didn't provide enough evidence that his intent is

This is nothing to be upset about or newsworthy. This probably happens every day. He got rejected because he didn't provide enough evidence that his intent is purely non-immigrant. https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/865787698581184512 https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/86578769858118451...

izacus 9y ago
Umm, I might have misunderstood you, but you're really telling us that that there's nothing wrong with that?
- mikeash 9y ago
  What is wrong with that?
  - izacus 9y ago
    What isn't wrong with rejecting someone from visiting a conference he got scholarship from? I mean, you can quote "security", "not enough paperwork", "he didn't smell right and a suit decided to reject him"... but in software we usually call that a bug - someone should be able to visit a conference but couldn't due to broken process. And there's A LOT wrong with making people miserable over paperwork. It has to serve people not enslave them.
    - mikeash 9y ago
      How can you be so sure that the process is broken, rather than this being the fault of the applicant? If a country requires certain paperwork to enter and you fail to provide it, is that the process's fault?
  - coldtea 9y ago
    That you shouldn't have to prove "non intent"? This is "presumed guilty".
    - FabHK 9y ago
      That's precisely the current legal situation in the USA. From Wikipedia (my emphasis): > The presumption in the law is that every nonimmigrant visa applicant (except certain employment-related applicants, who are exempt) is an intending immigrant unless otherwise proven. Therefore, applicants for most nonimmigrant visas must overcome this presumption by demonstrating that: * The purpose of their trip is to enter the U.S. for a specific, intended purpose; * They plan to remain for a specific, limited period; and * They have a residence outside the U.S. as well as other binding ties which will ensure their return at the end of their stay. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_the_United_States#Qualification_process https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_the_United_Stat...
    - MichaelGG 9y ago
      I mean, yea, basically. Why shouldn't it be that way? Probably a majority of the people of the world would prefer to live in the US/Canada/EU if given a choice. So it makes sense to assume they plan on staying and make them explain why they'd willingly return to an "inferior" country. But maybe some sort of bond procedure would be handy for this kind of thing where you really want someone to visit and are willing to stake a lot that they'll return. OTOH I'm sure if Apple wanted to get involved they could easily help him out on his application.
      - izacus 9y ago
        Because you don't want to live in a world where everyone behaves like that (towards you too). I thought we learned that lesson in the cold war. It's easy to debate from your position of power, but remember that it's easy that you can easily be the one rotting in an slump UK/EU/African or even your own bureaucracy. All the kid wanted to do is visit a tech conference. Why on earth are you defending the shitty process that tried to prevent that?
      - coldtea 9y ago
        >Probably a majority of the people of the world would prefer to live in the US/Canada/EU if given a choice. So it makes sense to assume they plan on staying and make them explain why they'd willingly return to an "inferior" country. That's so "American exceptionalism" way to think. People from some backwater developing countries maybe...
- FabHK 9y ago
  I think it's appalling. But: it does appear to be the law, and it happens many times a day, it's just that normally nobody pays attention.
- chrisper 9y ago
  When I first clicked on this, I thought that the guy must be from a banned Muslim country or something based on the title. So I assumed it would be another case of "anti-anti Muslim Ban" story. But it turned out he just got rejected like any other normal person could get rejected. That is what I meant. Like his position to be a Conference Scholarship Recipient does not have anything to do with this. He is just a normal guy like you and me who got denied for a normal reason.
Steer 9y ago
He is going to a conference obviously, but how does he prove that his intent is "purely non-immigrant" besides that? I mean, it seems to me this could be used to deny anyone entry since you can't very well prove it (I think) if it is not enough that you say that you are not trying to work or immigrate. Or am I misunderstanding something?
- gkya 9y ago
  Usually the best proof is a return ticket and an occupation back home (school, job, etc.). IDK if the guy has bought a return ticket. Also I don't (and won't, I can't take what is described in tens of news articles to be the way the US Border acts) have any experience w/ American visas, just European.
- FabHK 9y ago
  They might evaluate your ties to home (family, job, real estate, etc.), and statistics from your country of origin (i.e. an applicant from a poor country might have a higher hurdle to clear than an applicant from a developed country).
- DrJokepu 9y ago
  Ties to your home country, such as mortgage, lease, a job, things like that.
- chrisper 9y ago
  When I applied for a Visa, I had to explain them what my parents do etc. Basically you have to convince them that you have enough reasons to return back home. You can do that in many ways, like saying all your family is home, or you own a house at home etc. It is pretty much about convincing the person working at the consulate. I am guessing in certain countries they are stricter than others. I think there is an issue with Indians overstaying their Visa in the US, so maybe that's why they are so strict over there.
- AdamJacobMuller 9y ago
  Check out the show Border Security on Netflix. There's 3 versions, USA+Canada+Australia and they go quite in-depth on how the border security officers make these kinds of determinations. The Australian one is extra awesome because they have very tight import restrictions on food/plant products for biosecurity reasons and their proximity to Asia means there are tons of people trying to bring in very interesting (but illegal) items from those countries. Plus they have a whole series of really cute dogs that sniff out the food.
st3fan 9y ago
He included Apple's visa latter which I assume explains in detail that these folks are coming to the us for a conference and not for a work opportunity.
- FabHK 9y ago
  He asked for the letter later, to re-apply, from my understanding. And that letter might or might not be enough in the eye of the law - you can come to a conference and then stay, obviously. And as outlined below, that is the legal presumption. Just to be clear: I'm not defending that law, but saying that this case might well have been in accordance with the law. There are tons of similar cases that don't make HN. If you think this is crazy, you should work to change the law, not decry this particular case.
- MichaelGG 9y ago
  That doesn't really show why they'd choose to return, in and of itself.
motoboi 9y ago
I don't know if you had a visa interview lately, but it's not quite an interview, because they just ask you two or three questions and don't let you show any documents unless requested. My brother showed up with a folder full of documents, but was dismissed without showing any of it. Profile based, I think.
- chrisper 9y ago
  I had a visa interview in 2012. It was a few questions, but I think it largely depends on why you are coming to the country and where you are coming from.
brudgers 9y ago
I am not saying that Shah should have been denied entry, and personally, I think it kind of sucks. Shah's prolific tweeting probably worked against him in terms of proving his non-immigrant intent. Four days ago: I really want to work at this building https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/864459777904001024 https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/86445977790400102... Eight days ago: Apparently you can drive around in California as long as you have a valid license from anywhere. Really wish I’d planned for a longer stay. https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/863000617077194752 https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/86300061707719475... Twelve days ago: Wild to think that Jared Kushner’s brother being a VC might save H1B. https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/861600903429709824 https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/86160090342970982... May 2nd: I’m thinking of applying for 2 jobs. One is almost literally a stone’s throw away. The other is on a continent I’ve never stepped foot on. https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/859582140832333824 https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/85958214083233382... [Edit: This post is the result of my genuine curiosity. Again, I think it kind of sucks and the lost opportunity is unfortunate. I'm not trying to blame a victim or justify US immigration policy or trying to dig up dirt. I'm more interested in something approaching a root cause analysis that might help someone else avoid similar problems in the future. Getting a scholarship to WWDC is a big deal in a young person's life and getting refused a visa to attend is also a big deal.] [Edit: If the source had not been Twitter, I certainly would not have scrolled through the tweets. I pretty much hate Twitter as a news source because it favors sound bites over analysis.]
- jacobolus 9y ago
  So people who aspire to get work visas and relocate to the US should no longer be able to visit temporarily on tourist visas? That seems like a nonsensical policy. It’s not like he can get a job working as a software engineer for Apple as an undocumented immigrant. Edit for anyone confused: this is a comment about the policy, not about the parent poster.
  - brudgers 9y ago
    I'm not judging what should or should not be the case. My recently acquired lay understanding of a temporary visa to the US is that an applicant has the burden of proving that their intent is not immigrate. For me, the tweets do not create proof for belief that the applicant has no volition to immigrate. The tweets do not create proof for a belief that the applicant has an overwhelming volition to return. I suspect that the US State Department has more sophisticated tools for analysis than my hand scrolling through the last three weeks of the 46,000 tweets. For example, I'd not be surprised if it had tools for looking at social graphs and demographic data that correlates applicants marital status,socio-economic status, educational status, and country of origin for temporary visas with visa compliance. None of which is to take a stance on whether the process is fair or right or just or moral. The only stance I am taking is that it is the process and given that it is the process the result is understandable and that there is actionable intelligence based upon what happened.
emsy 9y ago
I know I will upset many when I say this but: Nobody cared when it happened under Obama's administration (as with most atrocities that happened when he was president).
- dominotw 9y ago
  It happened at much much larger scale in 2010. Noone gave a shit.
  - nitrogen 9y ago
    This level of deliberate ignorance of history is surprising to see on HN. Lots of people were just as concerned about abuses under Obama (and Bush before that) as under any other administrations.
    - dominotw 9y ago
      No they were not. I never heard of immigrant marches at airports in 2010. Care to back up your "just as concerned" ?
      - nitrogen 9y ago
        You could try backing up your claim that nobody cared in 2010. You didn't say anything about "immigrant marches" in your original post. Protest and petition change forms over time. The burden of proof does not. P.S. Thanks for reminding me why I stopped commenting on HN, saves me a bunch of time.
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
    - emsy 9y ago
      Yeah the "nobody" was hyperbole, but it's obvious that the current concerns are broadly driven by partisanship.

izacus 9y ago

Umm, I might have misunderstood you, but you're really telling us that that there's nothing wrong with that?

mikeash 9y ago
What is wrong with that?
- izacus 9y ago
  What isn't wrong with rejecting someone from visiting a conference he got scholarship from? I mean, you can quote "security", "not enough paperwork", "he didn't smell right and a suit decided to reject him"... but in software we usually call that a bug - someone should be able to visit a conference but couldn't due to broken process. And there's A LOT wrong with making people miserable over paperwork. It has to serve people not enslave them.
  - mikeash 9y ago
    How can you be so sure that the process is broken, rather than this being the fault of the applicant? If a country requires certain paperwork to enter and you fail to provide it, is that the process's fault?
- coldtea 9y ago
  That you shouldn't have to prove "non intent"? This is "presumed guilty".
  - FabHK 9y ago
    That's precisely the current legal situation in the USA. From Wikipedia (my emphasis): > The presumption in the law is that every nonimmigrant visa applicant (except certain employment-related applicants, who are exempt) is an intending immigrant unless otherwise proven. Therefore, applicants for most nonimmigrant visas must overcome this presumption by demonstrating that: * The purpose of their trip is to enter the U.S. for a specific, intended purpose; * They plan to remain for a specific, limited period; and * They have a residence outside the U.S. as well as other binding ties which will ensure their return at the end of their stay. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_the_United_States#Qualification_process https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_the_United_Stat...
  - MichaelGG 9y ago
    I mean, yea, basically. Why shouldn't it be that way? Probably a majority of the people of the world would prefer to live in the US/Canada/EU if given a choice. So it makes sense to assume they plan on staying and make them explain why they'd willingly return to an "inferior" country. But maybe some sort of bond procedure would be handy for this kind of thing where you really want someone to visit and are willing to stake a lot that they'll return. OTOH I'm sure if Apple wanted to get involved they could easily help him out on his application.
    - izacus 9y ago
      Because you don't want to live in a world where everyone behaves like that (towards you too). I thought we learned that lesson in the cold war. It's easy to debate from your position of power, but remember that it's easy that you can easily be the one rotting in an slump UK/EU/African or even your own bureaucracy. All the kid wanted to do is visit a tech conference. Why on earth are you defending the shitty process that tried to prevent that?
    - coldtea 9y ago
      >Probably a majority of the people of the world would prefer to live in the US/Canada/EU if given a choice. So it makes sense to assume they plan on staying and make them explain why they'd willingly return to an "inferior" country. That's so "American exceptionalism" way to think. People from some backwater developing countries maybe...
FabHK 9y ago
I think it's appalling. But: it does appear to be the law, and it happens many times a day, it's just that normally nobody pays attention.
chrisper 9y ago
When I first clicked on this, I thought that the guy must be from a banned Muslim country or something based on the title. So I assumed it would be another case of "anti-anti Muslim Ban" story. But it turned out he just got rejected like any other normal person could get rejected. That is what I meant. Like his position to be a Conference Scholarship Recipient does not have anything to do with this. He is just a normal guy like you and me who got denied for a normal reason.

Steer 9y ago

He is going to a conference obviously, but how does he prove that his intent is "purely non-immigrant" besides that? I mean, it seems to me this could be used to deny anyone entry since you can't very well prove it (I think) if it is not enough that you say that you are not trying to work or immigrate. Or am I misunderstanding something?

gkya 9y ago
Usually the best proof is a return ticket and an occupation back home (school, job, etc.). IDK if the guy has bought a return ticket. Also I don't (and won't, I can't take what is described in tens of news articles to be the way the US Border acts) have any experience w/ American visas, just European.
FabHK 9y ago
They might evaluate your ties to home (family, job, real estate, etc.), and statistics from your country of origin (i.e. an applicant from a poor country might have a higher hurdle to clear than an applicant from a developed country).
DrJokepu 9y ago
Ties to your home country, such as mortgage, lease, a job, things like that.
chrisper 9y ago
When I applied for a Visa, I had to explain them what my parents do etc. Basically you have to convince them that you have enough reasons to return back home. You can do that in many ways, like saying all your family is home, or you own a house at home etc. It is pretty much about convincing the person working at the consulate. I am guessing in certain countries they are stricter than others. I think there is an issue with Indians overstaying their Visa in the US, so maybe that's why they are so strict over there.
AdamJacobMuller 9y ago
Check out the show Border Security on Netflix. There's 3 versions, USA+Canada+Australia and they go quite in-depth on how the border security officers make these kinds of determinations. The Australian one is extra awesome because they have very tight import restrictions on food/plant products for biosecurity reasons and their proximity to Asia means there are tons of people trying to bring in very interesting (but illegal) items from those countries. Plus they have a whole series of really cute dogs that sniff out the food.

st3fan 9y ago

He included Apple's visa latter which I assume explains in detail that these folks are coming to the us for a conference and not for a work opportunity.

FabHK 9y ago
He asked for the letter later, to re-apply, from my understanding. And that letter might or might not be enough in the eye of the law - you can come to a conference and then stay, obviously. And as outlined below, that is the legal presumption. Just to be clear: I'm not defending that law, but saying that this case might well have been in accordance with the law. There are tons of similar cases that don't make HN. If you think this is crazy, you should work to change the law, not decry this particular case.
MichaelGG 9y ago
That doesn't really show why they'd choose to return, in and of itself.

motoboi 9y ago

I don't know if you had a visa interview lately, but it's not quite an interview, because they just ask you two or three questions and don't let you show any documents unless requested. My brother showed up with a folder full of documents, but was dismissed without showing any of it. Profile based, I think.

chrisper 9y ago
I had a visa interview in 2012. It was a few questions, but I think it largely depends on why you are coming to the country and where you are coming from.

brudgers 9y ago

I am not saying that Shah should have been denied entry, and personally, I think it kind of sucks. Shah's prolific tweeting probably worked against him in terms of proving his non-immigrant intent. Four days ago: I really want to work at this building https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/864459777904001024 https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/86445977790400102... Eight days ago: Apparently you can drive around in California as long as you have a valid license from anywhere. Really wish I’d planned for a longer stay. https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/863000617077194752 https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/86300061707719475... Twelve days ago: Wild to think that Jared Kushner’s brother being a VC might save H1B. https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/861600903429709824 https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/86160090342970982... May 2nd: I’m thinking of applying for 2 jobs. One is almost literally a stone’s throw away. The other is on a continent I’ve never stepped foot on. https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/859582140832333824 https://twitter.com/HarshilShah1910/status/85958214083233382... [Edit: This post is the result of my genuine curiosity. Again, I think it kind of sucks and the lost opportunity is unfortunate. I'm not trying to blame a victim or justify US immigration policy or trying to dig up dirt. I'm more interested in something approaching a root cause analysis that might help someone else avoid similar problems in the future. Getting a scholarship to WWDC is a big deal in a young person's life and getting refused a visa to attend is also a big deal.] [Edit: If the source had not been Twitter, I certainly would not have scrolled through the tweets. I pretty much hate Twitter as a news source because it favors sound bites over analysis.]

jacobolus 9y ago
So people who aspire to get work visas and relocate to the US should no longer be able to visit temporarily on tourist visas? That seems like a nonsensical policy. It’s not like he can get a job working as a software engineer for Apple as an undocumented immigrant. Edit for anyone confused: this is a comment about the policy, not about the parent poster.
- brudgers 9y ago
  I'm not judging what should or should not be the case. My recently acquired lay understanding of a temporary visa to the US is that an applicant has the burden of proving that their intent is not immigrate. For me, the tweets do not create proof for belief that the applicant has no volition to immigrate. The tweets do not create proof for a belief that the applicant has an overwhelming volition to return. I suspect that the US State Department has more sophisticated tools for analysis than my hand scrolling through the last three weeks of the 46,000 tweets. For example, I'd not be surprised if it had tools for looking at social graphs and demographic data that correlates applicants marital status,socio-economic status, educational status, and country of origin for temporary visas with visa compliance. None of which is to take a stance on whether the process is fair or right or just or moral. The only stance I am taking is that it is the process and given that it is the process the result is understandable and that there is actionable intelligence based upon what happened.

emsy 9y ago

I know I will upset many when I say this but: Nobody cared when it happened under Obama's administration (as with most atrocities that happened when he was president).

dominotw 9y ago
It happened at much much larger scale in 2010. Noone gave a shit.
- nitrogen 9y ago
  This level of deliberate ignorance of history is surprising to see on HN. Lots of people were just as concerned about abuses under Obama (and Bush before that) as under any other administrations.
  - dominotw 9y ago
    No they were not. I never heard of immigrant marches at airports in 2010. Care to back up your "just as concerned" ?
    - nitrogen 9y ago
      You could try backing up your claim that nobody cared in 2010. You didn't say anything about "immigrant marches" in your original post. Protest and petition change forms over time. The burden of proof does not. P.S. Thanks for reminding me why I stopped commenting on HN, saves me a bunch of time.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
  - emsy 9y ago
    Yeah the "nobody" was hyperbole, but it's obvious that the current concerns are broadly driven by partisanship.