> Without seeing the comments it's difficult to know if this is a reasonable call or not. I can certainly imagine posts from Facebook friends that I think would

> Without seeing the comments it's difficult to know if this is a reasonable call or not. I can certainly imagine posts from Facebook friends that I think would be disqualifying for a visa, but I can also imagine government employees overreacting. He already received a visa. That was already approved. This was the CBP agent at the border. > On the other hand, my immediate thought on reading this is that I wouldn't let my phone, and definitely not my accounts, get searched on visiting a foreign country. I'd also support people encrypting their phones and turning them off prior to government checkpoints. I just don't know how to square my intuitions there with my doubts about this case. Then you will enjoy a prompt flight home. Do you really believe that the customs agent will say "oh darn, he said no. I guess I have to let him in then." > ...it strikes me as a bit elitist of the NYT to add "Harvard Student" to the title... This is called adding context. It shows how anyone can be affected by the capricious rules. A harvard student with an approved student visa was denied entry. This means he was vetted by the US State Department and Harvard University. This isn't just some tourist coming to see the sights. Should the NY Times have simply said "university student?" What would that have helped?