4 ms·

Hardly rational, considering these 9 are excluded while a large percentage of the ~360k or so Chinese students studying in the US (and the ~3 million Chinese to

Hardly rational, considering these 9 are excluded while a large percentage of the ~360k or so Chinese students studying in the US (and the ~3 million Chinese tourists that come to the US every year) seem to be able to travel in and out of the US. It's buzzword bingo. China + CBP = web traffic. It's hot right now, so this is a good article to write if you're interested in clicks. The implication here that a policy change has happened is (thus far) false. These 9 people were flagged for some specific, long standing reason, and it's generally not news except for the buzzwords that make it "interesting".

nraynaud 7y ago
The policy has changed, there is no precedent according to professionals. There were way more students flagged than that on that day, ASU is the only one coming forward for now. But they had never seen such a high secondary screening rate, detained for so long, such a weird return “deal”, nor that many visa revoked in a single day.
- pbourke 7y ago
  What do you mean weird return deal? Isn’t that a common practice when someone is found inadmissible? If nothing else is out of order, you’re given the chance to withdraw your request to enter the US.
  - nraynaud 7y ago
    After the visa as been revoked?
  - mikelward 7y ago
    I thought normally the airline paid in this case?
    - mikelward 7y ago
      I misunderstood. It sounds like the airline must fly them back, but they can recover their costs from the passenger. https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/23622/who-pays-for-the-return-air-ticket-when-a-country-refuses-entry-by-air https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/23622/who-pays-fo...
  - shkkmo 7y ago
    The "weird deal" is this: > told they needed to return to China, that they needed to pay for their own airline ticket to do so or face a ban from re-entering the U.S. for five years It is not normal for a re-entry ban to made contingent on the traveler paying for the return ticket. Usually airlines are required by the government to pay for the return ticket and it is left up to the airlines to recover that cost from their passengers. My guess would be either that 1) government officials are trying to avoid any legal conflict with airlines about the grounds on which entry was denied. or 2) Airline lobby groups got this policy implemented to reduce their costs.
- diminoten 7y ago
  If you've got actual evidence the policy has changed, let's see it. This article has none, no one else has any, but if you've got new information, now is the time to come forward with it.
Rapzid 7y ago
This is just the news tip of clicks iceberg. There will be dozens of opinion pieces released on this topic that are each tailored to different demographics; a headline for every political proclivity! Righteous outrage boners for all. These opinion pieces will contain a bunch of factual errors and logical phalacies, but they are opinion pieces right? Except most people will just associate them with the news organizations that published them leaving them open to accusations of "fake news" from all sides and destroying the credibility of their news/investigative journalism. My 2019 State of The Media Industrial Complex.
PhasmaFelis 7y ago
If you revoke someone's visa, refuse to tell them why (for days so far), and strongarm them into paying for their own return ticket, something is badly fucked up on a systemic level. It wouldn't matter if it was only one person.

nraynaud 7y ago

The policy has changed, there is no precedent according to professionals. There were way more students flagged than that on that day, ASU is the only one coming forward for now. But they had never seen such a high secondary screening rate, detained for so long, such a weird return “deal”, nor that many visa revoked in a single day.

pbourke 7y ago
What do you mean weird return deal? Isn’t that a common practice when someone is found inadmissible? If nothing else is out of order, you’re given the chance to withdraw your request to enter the US.
- nraynaud 7y ago
  After the visa as been revoked?
- mikelward 7y ago
  I thought normally the airline paid in this case?
  - mikelward 7y ago
    I misunderstood. It sounds like the airline must fly them back, but they can recover their costs from the passenger. https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/23622/who-pays-for-the-return-air-ticket-when-a-country-refuses-entry-by-air https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/23622/who-pays-fo...
- shkkmo 7y ago
  The "weird deal" is this: > told they needed to return to China, that they needed to pay for their own airline ticket to do so or face a ban from re-entering the U.S. for five years It is not normal for a re-entry ban to made contingent on the traveler paying for the return ticket. Usually airlines are required by the government to pay for the return ticket and it is left up to the airlines to recover that cost from their passengers. My guess would be either that 1) government officials are trying to avoid any legal conflict with airlines about the grounds on which entry was denied. or 2) Airline lobby groups got this policy implemented to reduce their costs.
diminoten 7y ago
If you've got actual evidence the policy has changed, let's see it. This article has none, no one else has any, but if you've got new information, now is the time to come forward with it.

Rapzid 7y ago

This is just the news tip of clicks iceberg. There will be dozens of opinion pieces released on this topic that are each tailored to different demographics; a headline for every political proclivity! Righteous outrage boners for all. These opinion pieces will contain a bunch of factual errors and logical phalacies, but they are opinion pieces right? Except most people will just associate them with the news organizations that published them leaving them open to accusations of "fake news" from all sides and destroying the credibility of their news/investigative journalism. My 2019 State of The Media Industrial Complex.

PhasmaFelis 7y ago

If you revoke someone's visa, refuse to tell them why (for days so far), and strongarm them into paying for their own return ticket, something is badly fucked up on a systemic level. It wouldn't matter if it was only one person.