8 ms·

Isn't "freed and flown home" the same thing as "deported"? These were routine professionals doing a job they took in good faith under rules and norms that have

by ajross 1y ago

Isn't "freed and flown home" the same thing as "deported"? These were routine professionals doing a job they took in good faith under rules and norms that have held for a century or more.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
metrix 1y ago
I don't quite understand what happened other than "deported by ICE".
- sb8244 1y ago
  The article makes it sound as if there were govt negotiations to have them sent home. It is light on details though, but with that many people of a friendly nation / corporation I imagine they get treated differently. I interpreted that to mean they may not have permanent US immigration issues vs "being deported".
  - fsckboy 1y ago
    the national debate and evolving policies wrt deportations the past year has focused on: 1. getting those with criminal records depoarted and not allowed back (a fair number of whom have been depoted and have violated the ban on returning) 2. getting those who've wished to settle and work jobs to leave voluntarily by buying them plane tickets and giving them cash stipends and not barring their reentry in the future These Koreans who came to Georgia on behalf of their company will probably not have their tickets paid for by the US nor get the stipend, so yes, they are treated differently as you suggest. after the surprise arrests executing the judicial warrant, the Korean company and government stepped forward and expressed a commitment to helping these workers, which occurred without negotiation, although you could call the flurry of phone calls after that negotiations, it was probably more like "Q; what do we need to do" "A: you need to bring them home". neither country nor the companies involved is looking to disturb relations, though perhaps this is adjacent to a tariff negotiation.
    - notpachet 1y ago
      > 2. getting those who've wished to settle and work jobs to leave voluntarily by buying them plane tickets and not barring their reentry in the future If you think the current administration is giving cash stipends to anyone it's been working to deport as part of its dragnet, I have a very large bridge to sell you.
      - fsckboy 1y ago
        it's a real policy (it's an app), provide a link if you have a source that says it's not, otherwise you're just unproductively snarking. it's certainly cost effective, a few thousand voluntary is much cheaper than administrative means.
        notpachet 1y ago
        I have friends who've been deported without criminal records. They didn't get paid anything. I don't know what you're talking about. I'll repeat what I said: > If you think the current administration is giving cash stipends to anyone it's been working to deport as part of its dragnet What policy or app says "when ICE deports people, give them a stipend" ? Edit: Here's the ICE manual on how deportations are conducted[1]. There's no mention of cash payouts. [1] https://www.ice.gov/doclib/foia/dro_policy_memos/09684drofieldpolicymanual.pdf https://www.ice.gov/doclib/foia/dro_policy_memos/09684drofie...
        fsckboy 1y ago
        as I said before, the program is to volunteer to go home prior to being deported by the govt; the point is by volunteering you save the cost of deportation (agents, lawyers, court time, incarceration, transportation) so if your friends were deported before applying, then it's too late because that deportation already cost the govt money. the program is only months old, so if your friends got deported before that it wouldn't apply. you have to apply for the program (I think you just download the app and sign up) in advance, you can't just return home and then apply. https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/05/05/dhs-announces-historic-travel-assistance-and-stipend-voluntary-self-deportation https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/05/05/dhs-announces-historic-t... https://www.ice.gov/self-deportation https://www.ice.gov/self-deportation
gruez 1y ago
>Federal and immigration agents arrested 475 people on Thursday — mostly South Korean nationals — while executing a judicial search warrant as part of a criminal investigation into alleged unlawful employment at the facility. > ... >South Korea will “push forward measures to review and improve the residency status and visa system for personnel travelling to the United States.” The implication seems to be that the workers didn't have authorization to work there.
- ajross 1y ago
  > The implication seems to be that the workers didn't have authorization to work there. No one ever does, by that standard. In the US, if you're a professional coming in to do some short-term thing, there's no visa process. You just fly in and get the stamp in your passport, which is technically treated as a "waiver of visa". Then you do your job and go home. Like, have you every flown somewhere to attend a conference and a meeting? Same thing. Where's the "authorization"?
  - gruez 1y ago
    >Like, have you every flown somewhere to attend a conference and a meeting? Same thing. Where's the "authorization"? Something tells me that working at a factory, even for "training" purposes is very different than attending a conference. Wikipedia confirms this: >There are restrictions on the type of employment-related activities allowed. Meetings and conferences in relation to the travelers' profession, line of business or employer in their home country are generally acceptable, but most forms of "gainful employment" are not. There are however poorly-classifiable exceptions such as persons performing professional services in the United States for a non-U.S. employer, and persons installing, servicing and repairing commercial or industrial equipment or machinery pursuant to a contract of sale.[26] Performers (such as actors and musicians) who plan on performing live or taping scenes for productions in their country of origin, as well as athletes participating in an athletic event, are likewise not allowed to use the VWP for their respective engagements and are instead required to have an O or P visa prior to arrival. Foreign media representatives and journalists on assignment are required to have a nonimmigrant media (I) visa.[27]
joezydeco 1y ago
The one detail I can't seem to find anywhere was what type of visa these SK nationals used to enter the US, and if they overstayed. This isn't exactly new territory. A lot of countries are very careful to avoid letting you in on a tourist visa if you give off the appearance of entering to work.
- ajross 1y ago
  > The one detail I can't seem to find anywhere was what type of visa these SK nationals used to enter the US, and if they overstayed. Because there is no visa process for short term professional work in the US, and never has been. > A lot of countries are very careful to avoid letting you in on a tourist visa if you give off the appearance of entering to work. That's just wrong. Virtually the entirety of the professional world travels around between industrial countries on tourist visas. Otherwise anyone going to a trade show is an "illegal" at risk of deportation.
  - detaro 1y ago
    There's work and work. Most "tourist" visa will cover things like attending conferences or tradeshows, meetings with a different branch of your employer or customers etc, but on the other side more dedicated work, conference talks you are compensated for, ... can quickly be treated differently. And if you don't come from a preferred part of the world even the former can quickly be quite a process to prove it.
    - ghaff 1y ago
      Exactly. Being nervous, of a "suspicious" ethnicity, giving any indication that you're being paid for being in the country, can probably all lead to issues. As I wrote elsewhere, aside from some countries that require a visa for any explicit business activity, a basic visa is typically fine to go to a conference or meet with a customer, much less send some emails.
  - ehnto 1y ago
    That is my impression of travelling to the US right now. Non zero risk of baseless detainment and deportation, and a non zero risk of being sent to a different country than the one you live in. No thanks. I'll stream the conference online.
rayiner 1y ago
[flagged]
- philwelch 1y ago
  This is one of many issues that people are disingenuous about. They just want open borders even if it means ignoring the law and the preferences of the American people.
- TimorousBestie 1y ago
  > Where are the goalposts? Are you suggesting that some people found to be working illegally shouldn’t be deported? H1-B reform should be table stakes and simple for this administration to tackle, since they “don’t give a shit” (a direct quote from VPOTUS) about laws and the legislative process. If the administration actually cared about making it easier for foreign companies to invest in domestic production capacity, they could accomplish it overnight.
  - cmxch 1y ago
    Remove the entire program root and stem by repealing the 1965 Immigration Act and all its provisions. Then create a system that makes it unprofitable to body shop out US citizens and compensates those that have been.
- dtjb 1y ago
  Norms and goalposts aside, what’s the value in adopting a formal policy of harassment against non-criminal, non-violent workers? Congress can debate immigration laws on the books, but this cultural shift seems to be something else entirely. Instead of measured enforcement, it appears to be the normalization of cruelty. We're punishing people who are part of the workforce contributing to our country's economic output. Seems like the real question is, what do we get out of this? Because it doesn't appear to be aligned with security or prosperity. It's just needless suffering, bureaucracy, and wasted resources.
  - gruez 1y ago
    >Norms and goalposts aside, what’s the value in adopting a formal policy of harassment against non-criminal, non-violent workers? Deterring irregular economic migration? If the government adopts a non-formal policy of not prosecuting non-criminal non-violent workers, it's implicitly saying it's fine to people to violate immigration laws and come here to work, as long as you don't cause trouble. You might think this is fine because free movement of labor is good or whatever, but that's not what most Americans want.
skybrian 1y ago
Yes, but it still seems like relatively good news for temporary workers who have a home in a safe country to go back to. We’re not talking about Haiti.
wombatpm 1y ago
This administration is taking people who dutifully show up for court hearings as part of their asylum claims and shipping them back to their country of origin. To make it worse, they are sending their confidential asylum paperwork to the country directly. The South Koreans are lucky they are being sent to the correct Korea.
Discordian93 1y ago
"Deported" now seems to be an euphemism for being sent to a concentration camp in a random third world country, so I guess they have to use different language for actual deportations.
treetalker 1y ago
Before IIRIRA in 1996, US immigration law had separate processes for deportation and exclusion. Since then, we have a single, unified process called removal. So technically deportation no longer exists. It is more proper to say that someone is being removed.
eunos 1y ago
It's a bit different since they "srlf-deport" before the government formally deport them. That mean they are not banned from coming to the US next time.
dfxm12 1y ago
"Deported" has several meanings, especially in recent context for deportees from the USA. One can be deported to a detention facility in a country one has no ties to, for example. This unfortunately has happened often enough that it is important to distinguish exactly which flavor of deportation is happening...
- rayiner 1y ago
  [flagged]

by ajross 1y ago

Isn't "freed and flown home" the same thing as "deported"? These were routine professionals doing a job they took in good faith under rules and norms that have held for a century or more.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

metrix 1y ago

I don't quite understand what happened other than "deported by ICE".

sb8244 1y ago
The article makes it sound as if there were govt negotiations to have them sent home. It is light on details though, but with that many people of a friendly nation / corporation I imagine they get treated differently. I interpreted that to mean they may not have permanent US immigration issues vs "being deported".
- fsckboy 1y ago
  the national debate and evolving policies wrt deportations the past year has focused on: 1. getting those with criminal records depoarted and not allowed back (a fair number of whom have been depoted and have violated the ban on returning) 2. getting those who've wished to settle and work jobs to leave voluntarily by buying them plane tickets and giving them cash stipends and not barring their reentry in the future These Koreans who came to Georgia on behalf of their company will probably not have their tickets paid for by the US nor get the stipend, so yes, they are treated differently as you suggest. after the surprise arrests executing the judicial warrant, the Korean company and government stepped forward and expressed a commitment to helping these workers, which occurred without negotiation, although you could call the flurry of phone calls after that negotiations, it was probably more like "Q; what do we need to do" "A: you need to bring them home". neither country nor the companies involved is looking to disturb relations, though perhaps this is adjacent to a tariff negotiation.
  - notpachet 1y ago
    > 2. getting those who've wished to settle and work jobs to leave voluntarily by buying them plane tickets and not barring their reentry in the future If you think the current administration is giving cash stipends to anyone it's been working to deport as part of its dragnet, I have a very large bridge to sell you.
    - fsckboy 1y ago
      it's a real policy (it's an app), provide a link if you have a source that says it's not, otherwise you're just unproductively snarking. it's certainly cost effective, a few thousand voluntary is much cheaper than administrative means.
      - notpachet 1y ago
        I have friends who've been deported without criminal records. They didn't get paid anything. I don't know what you're talking about. I'll repeat what I said: > If you think the current administration is giving cash stipends to anyone it's been working to deport as part of its dragnet What policy or app says "when ICE deports people, give them a stipend" ? Edit: Here's the ICE manual on how deportations are conducted[1]. There's no mention of cash payouts. [1] https://www.ice.gov/doclib/foia/dro_policy_memos/09684drofieldpolicymanual.pdf https://www.ice.gov/doclib/foia/dro_policy_memos/09684drofie...
        fsckboy 1y ago
        as I said before, the program is to volunteer to go home prior to being deported by the govt; the point is by volunteering you save the cost of deportation (agents, lawyers, court time, incarceration, transportation) so if your friends were deported before applying, then it's too late because that deportation already cost the govt money. the program is only months old, so if your friends got deported before that it wouldn't apply. you have to apply for the program (I think you just download the app and sign up) in advance, you can't just return home and then apply. https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/05/05/dhs-announces-historic-travel-assistance-and-stipend-voluntary-self-deportation https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/05/05/dhs-announces-historic-t... https://www.ice.gov/self-deportation https://www.ice.gov/self-deportation

gruez 1y ago

>Federal and immigration agents arrested 475 people on Thursday — mostly South Korean nationals — while executing a judicial search warrant as part of a criminal investigation into alleged unlawful employment at the facility. > ... >South Korea will “push forward measures to review and improve the residency status and visa system for personnel travelling to the United States.” The implication seems to be that the workers didn't have authorization to work there.

ajross 1y ago
> The implication seems to be that the workers didn't have authorization to work there. No one ever does, by that standard. In the US, if you're a professional coming in to do some short-term thing, there's no visa process. You just fly in and get the stamp in your passport, which is technically treated as a "waiver of visa". Then you do your job and go home. Like, have you every flown somewhere to attend a conference and a meeting? Same thing. Where's the "authorization"?
- gruez 1y ago
  >Like, have you every flown somewhere to attend a conference and a meeting? Same thing. Where's the "authorization"? Something tells me that working at a factory, even for "training" purposes is very different than attending a conference. Wikipedia confirms this: >There are restrictions on the type of employment-related activities allowed. Meetings and conferences in relation to the travelers' profession, line of business or employer in their home country are generally acceptable, but most forms of "gainful employment" are not. There are however poorly-classifiable exceptions such as persons performing professional services in the United States for a non-U.S. employer, and persons installing, servicing and repairing commercial or industrial equipment or machinery pursuant to a contract of sale.[26] Performers (such as actors and musicians) who plan on performing live or taping scenes for productions in their country of origin, as well as athletes participating in an athletic event, are likewise not allowed to use the VWP for their respective engagements and are instead required to have an O or P visa prior to arrival. Foreign media representatives and journalists on assignment are required to have a nonimmigrant media (I) visa.[27]

joezydeco 1y ago

The one detail I can't seem to find anywhere was what type of visa these SK nationals used to enter the US, and if they overstayed. This isn't exactly new territory. A lot of countries are very careful to avoid letting you in on a tourist visa if you give off the appearance of entering to work.

ajross 1y ago
> The one detail I can't seem to find anywhere was what type of visa these SK nationals used to enter the US, and if they overstayed. Because there is no visa process for short term professional work in the US, and never has been. > A lot of countries are very careful to avoid letting you in on a tourist visa if you give off the appearance of entering to work. That's just wrong. Virtually the entirety of the professional world travels around between industrial countries on tourist visas. Otherwise anyone going to a trade show is an "illegal" at risk of deportation.
- detaro 1y ago
  There's work and work. Most "tourist" visa will cover things like attending conferences or tradeshows, meetings with a different branch of your employer or customers etc, but on the other side more dedicated work, conference talks you are compensated for, ... can quickly be treated differently. And if you don't come from a preferred part of the world even the former can quickly be quite a process to prove it.
  - ghaff 1y ago
    Exactly. Being nervous, of a "suspicious" ethnicity, giving any indication that you're being paid for being in the country, can probably all lead to issues. As I wrote elsewhere, aside from some countries that require a visa for any explicit business activity, a basic visa is typically fine to go to a conference or meet with a customer, much less send some emails.
- ehnto 1y ago
  That is my impression of travelling to the US right now. Non zero risk of baseless detainment and deportation, and a non zero risk of being sent to a different country than the one you live in. No thanks. I'll stream the conference online.

rayiner 1y ago

[flagged]

philwelch 1y ago
This is one of many issues that people are disingenuous about. They just want open borders even if it means ignoring the law and the preferences of the American people.
TimorousBestie 1y ago
> Where are the goalposts? Are you suggesting that some people found to be working illegally shouldn’t be deported? H1-B reform should be table stakes and simple for this administration to tackle, since they “don’t give a shit” (a direct quote from VPOTUS) about laws and the legislative process. If the administration actually cared about making it easier for foreign companies to invest in domestic production capacity, they could accomplish it overnight.
- cmxch 1y ago
  Remove the entire program root and stem by repealing the 1965 Immigration Act and all its provisions. Then create a system that makes it unprofitable to body shop out US citizens and compensates those that have been.
dtjb 1y ago
Norms and goalposts aside, what’s the value in adopting a formal policy of harassment against non-criminal, non-violent workers? Congress can debate immigration laws on the books, but this cultural shift seems to be something else entirely. Instead of measured enforcement, it appears to be the normalization of cruelty. We're punishing people who are part of the workforce contributing to our country's economic output. Seems like the real question is, what do we get out of this? Because it doesn't appear to be aligned with security or prosperity. It's just needless suffering, bureaucracy, and wasted resources.
- gruez 1y ago
  >Norms and goalposts aside, what’s the value in adopting a formal policy of harassment against non-criminal, non-violent workers? Deterring irregular economic migration? If the government adopts a non-formal policy of not prosecuting non-criminal non-violent workers, it's implicitly saying it's fine to people to violate immigration laws and come here to work, as long as you don't cause trouble. You might think this is fine because free movement of labor is good or whatever, but that's not what most Americans want.

skybrian 1y ago

Yes, but it still seems like relatively good news for temporary workers who have a home in a safe country to go back to. We’re not talking about Haiti.

wombatpm 1y ago

This administration is taking people who dutifully show up for court hearings as part of their asylum claims and shipping them back to their country of origin. To make it worse, they are sending their confidential asylum paperwork to the country directly. The South Koreans are lucky they are being sent to the correct Korea.

Discordian93 1y ago

"Deported" now seems to be an euphemism for being sent to a concentration camp in a random third world country, so I guess they have to use different language for actual deportations.

treetalker 1y ago

Before IIRIRA in 1996, US immigration law had separate processes for deportation and exclusion. Since then, we have a single, unified process called removal. So technically deportation no longer exists. It is more proper to say that someone is being removed.

eunos 1y ago

It's a bit different since they "srlf-deport" before the government formally deport them. That mean they are not banned from coming to the US next time.

dfxm12 1y ago

"Deported" has several meanings, especially in recent context for deportees from the USA. One can be deported to a detention facility in a country one has no ties to, for example. This unfortunately has happened often enough that it is important to distinguish exactly which flavor of deportation is happening...

rayiner 1y ago
[flagged]