3 ms·

Overall you can have Global Entry revoked for almost anything; one of the clauses is “The applicant has been found in violation of any customs, immigration, or

by bri3d 9mo ago

Overall you can have Global Entry revoked for almost anything; one of the clauses is “The applicant has been found in violation of any customs, immigration, or agriculture regulations, procedures, or laws in any country.” which falls dramatically short of a crime or investigation. There are many reports of GE revocation for stuff like failure to declare fruits at checkpoints.

metadat 9mo ago
How is attending a protest a potential violation of customs regulations? This doesn't track.
- bri3d 9mo ago
  The argument, if there is one, would probably be that following ICE was a violation of an immigration procedure (note that the person who had their GE revoked doesn’t claim they attended a protest, but rather that they were following ICE and got their picture taken). Given what I’ve seen of GE revocations historically, though, it’s equally likely to have been something like “you lived with a felon” or “unpaid traffic ticket became a warrant” or “family member was accused but never convicted of an obscure crime.” There’s always been a pretty clear mantra that GE is a privilege not a right and that it’s always been an arbitrary and capricious system. In some ways I think maintaining GE is probably as hard or harder than maintaining a low level (ie Secret) security clearance; it seems to be based on similar databases and discretion with less transparency, human touch, or opportunity to appeal. They are at least (according to the 9th circuit) supposed to disclose why the GE was revoked though: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2024/05/22/22-56015.pdf https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2024/05/22/2...
- JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
  > How is attending a protest a potential violation of customs regulations? FTFA: “Protesting isn’t a listed or ‘valid’ reason for having Global Entry revoked, but being arrested at a protest is. Impeding or interfering with the agency is. And being investigated is.”
  - throw2937374 9mo ago
    Looks like this is a social credit system.
    - JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
      > Looks like this is a social credit system To the extent it’s a government program with any discretion, yes. In every other respect, no.
    - bri3d 9mo ago
      Global Entry absolutely is a completely voluntary social credit system? It’s an optional thing you literally subscribe to that says “I’m squeaky clean so I can skip the investigation line.”
      - JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
        > Global Entry absolutely is a completely voluntary social credit system? They’re making analogy to China’s social-credit system. It would be like if Global Entry was held by most Americans and you needed it to get a credit card or board a train.
      - toofy 9mo ago
        right, but as the post above says: > “Protesting isn’t a listed or ‘valid’ reason for having Global Entry revoked, but being arrested at a protest is… And being investigated is.” its no secret they're declaring everything a protest. they are actively and seemingly randomly roaming, demanding ids, and then declaring everything from that moment forward a protest. this isnt imaginary, its happening regularly. it’s no secret how many people they have arrested and released an hour or two later once they’re "investigated." it’s also no secret that they’re simply arresting people, who arent at a protest, but who happen to be in the same street they’ve roamed to. if they roam into my neighborhood, and if i were to be outside walking my dog, they demand my id which i probably wouldnt have because im just walking my dog. so they arrest me. hours later let me go because they’ve "investigated" and oops, just a neighbor out walking his dog.. if they've declared it a protest, this would mean i would have just been arrested and investigated at what they call a protest. so now in this situation i would barred from global entry because they’ve declared everyone in their eyeline worthy of arrest and then wrongly arrested and investigated me? what a cluster fuck. we need to get due process back, this is insanity. not to mention that protesting, just like legally carrying a firearm is absolutely protected by the constitution and not at all a criminal offense. getting arrested at a protest because they dont like protesters is absolutely not a reliable indicator of any kind of illegality.
ajross 9mo ago
Yes, but even so doing it because of protest is a restraint on speech, and that's expressly prohibited by the constitution. The first amendment may be frustratingly silent on fruit trade regulations, but it's 100% not unclear about abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
necubi 9mo ago
Expressing your first amendment right to protest is not “almost anything.” Historically, courts have taken very dim view of government retaliation for first-amendment protected activities.
- ottah 9mo ago
  It's trivial for the state to punish you and nearly impossible to assert your own rights. It is a very hard legal battle to get those rights acknowledged and upheld by the courts.
  - JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
    > nearly impossible to assert your own rights. It is a very hard legal battle to get those rights acknowledged and upheld by the courts What are you basing this on? This administration is constantly losing in court.
    - SilverElfin 9mo ago
      They mean it’s costly - in time and money - so in practice random individuals who are abused by the government can’t defend their rights and simply have to accept losing them. Plus even if the administration loses, why would they care? They aren’t going to jail for those losses.
      - JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
        > They mean it’s costly Which is far from “nearly impossible.” > even if the administration loses, why would they care? They aren’t going to jail Neither is someone whose TSA PreCheck is revoked.
    - NotSammyHagar 9mo ago
      They lose but ignore that they have lost, just keep going, the courts aren't shutting them down very effectively.
asdfaslkj353 9mo ago
[dead]

by bri3d 9mo ago

metadat 9mo ago

How is attending a protest a potential violation of customs regulations? This doesn't track.

bri3d 9mo ago
The argument, if there is one, would probably be that following ICE was a violation of an immigration procedure (note that the person who had their GE revoked doesn’t claim they attended a protest, but rather that they were following ICE and got their picture taken). Given what I’ve seen of GE revocations historically, though, it’s equally likely to have been something like “you lived with a felon” or “unpaid traffic ticket became a warrant” or “family member was accused but never convicted of an obscure crime.” There’s always been a pretty clear mantra that GE is a privilege not a right and that it’s always been an arbitrary and capricious system. In some ways I think maintaining GE is probably as hard or harder than maintaining a low level (ie Secret) security clearance; it seems to be based on similar databases and discretion with less transparency, human touch, or opportunity to appeal. They are at least (according to the 9th circuit) supposed to disclose why the GE was revoked though: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2024/05/22/22-56015.pdf https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2024/05/22/2...
JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
> How is attending a protest a potential violation of customs regulations? FTFA: “Protesting isn’t a listed or ‘valid’ reason for having Global Entry revoked, but being arrested at a protest is. Impeding or interfering with the agency is. And being investigated is.”
- throw2937374 9mo ago
  Looks like this is a social credit system.
  - JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
    > Looks like this is a social credit system To the extent it’s a government program with any discretion, yes. In every other respect, no.
  - bri3d 9mo ago
    Global Entry absolutely is a completely voluntary social credit system? It’s an optional thing you literally subscribe to that says “I’m squeaky clean so I can skip the investigation line.”
    - JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
      > Global Entry absolutely is a completely voluntary social credit system? They’re making analogy to China’s social-credit system. It would be like if Global Entry was held by most Americans and you needed it to get a credit card or board a train.
    - toofy 9mo ago
      right, but as the post above says: > “Protesting isn’t a listed or ‘valid’ reason for having Global Entry revoked, but being arrested at a protest is… And being investigated is.” its no secret they're declaring everything a protest. they are actively and seemingly randomly roaming, demanding ids, and then declaring everything from that moment forward a protest. this isnt imaginary, its happening regularly. it’s no secret how many people they have arrested and released an hour or two later once they’re "investigated." it’s also no secret that they’re simply arresting people, who arent at a protest, but who happen to be in the same street they’ve roamed to. if they roam into my neighborhood, and if i were to be outside walking my dog, they demand my id which i probably wouldnt have because im just walking my dog. so they arrest me. hours later let me go because they’ve "investigated" and oops, just a neighbor out walking his dog.. if they've declared it a protest, this would mean i would have just been arrested and investigated at what they call a protest. so now in this situation i would barred from global entry because they’ve declared everyone in their eyeline worthy of arrest and then wrongly arrested and investigated me? what a cluster fuck. we need to get due process back, this is insanity. not to mention that protesting, just like legally carrying a firearm is absolutely protected by the constitution and not at all a criminal offense. getting arrested at a protest because they dont like protesters is absolutely not a reliable indicator of any kind of illegality.

ajross 9mo ago

Yes, but even so doing it because of protest is a restraint on speech, and that's expressly prohibited by the constitution. The first amendment may be frustratingly silent on fruit trade regulations, but it's 100% not unclear about abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

necubi 9mo ago

Expressing your first amendment right to protest is not “almost anything.” Historically, courts have taken very dim view of government retaliation for first-amendment protected activities.

ottah 9mo ago
It's trivial for the state to punish you and nearly impossible to assert your own rights. It is a very hard legal battle to get those rights acknowledged and upheld by the courts.
- JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
  > nearly impossible to assert your own rights. It is a very hard legal battle to get those rights acknowledged and upheld by the courts What are you basing this on? This administration is constantly losing in court.
  - SilverElfin 9mo ago
    They mean it’s costly - in time and money - so in practice random individuals who are abused by the government can’t defend their rights and simply have to accept losing them. Plus even if the administration loses, why would they care? They aren’t going to jail for those losses.
    - JumpCrisscross 9mo ago
      > They mean it’s costly Which is far from “nearly impossible.” > even if the administration loses, why would they care? They aren’t going to jail Neither is someone whose TSA PreCheck is revoked.
  - NotSammyHagar 9mo ago
    They lose but ignore that they have lost, just keep going, the courts aren't shutting them down very effectively.

asdfaslkj353 9mo ago

[dead]