16 ms·

Jordanian citizen was denied re-entry to the US on eve of his PhD defense at JHU

500 points by denzil_correa 13y ago

lmgftp 13y ago
Their decision was probably based in some way (assuming it's based on available information, which is admittedly risky) in his marriage to a foreign national while expressing interest in moving to the states, and the embassy's reluctance to chance him violating his visa permissions and in some way moving here with his wife in a permanent resident-alien w/o a visa type manner. Not claiming to know anything special, but if that really is the only perturbed variable, it most likely hinged on that. Or familial ties that are somehow inscrutable. All conjecture, but I find these single cases to be ridiculous, because there are competent individuals in government who oft do what they're supposed to, even if the whole government mechanism appears corrupt and broken. Most likely there was a legitimate reason, and of course we only have one side of the story here, by an associate professor and his PhD student.
- monsterix 13y ago
  > but I find these single cases to be ridiculous, because there are competent individuals in government who oft do what they're supposed to, even if the whole government mechanism appears corrupt and broken. Most likely there was a legitimate reason, and of course we only have one side of the story here, by an associate professor and his PhD student. You'll understand only when you face it. What legitimate reasons are you applying to justify treatment of any or every person on the planet as potential threat? Without a means for recourse. And then if you're agreeable to the logic of scrutiny and transparency from others then why not apply the same logic to the individuals in the Government?
  - VLM 13y ago
    "What legitimate reasons are you applying to justify treatment of any or every person on the planet as potential threat" Because they are? Approximately zero risk, true, but slightly over zero. Its a pretty simple straightforward game theory problem. Whats the total aggregate sum of the trouble you'll get into by letting 1 out of 100 million terrorist thru, vs simply stamping "denied national security" on any random visa and stonewalling? In fact the guy who dared complain about it is probably now on some secret NSA list, and perhaps also now on the no-fly list. That'll show people what happens to complainers, hopefully that prof never has to fly anywhere again for the rest of his life... and probably his families lives, too. Note, I'm not supporting an unjust system, just explaining how it works from a game theory perspective. I don't see why any individual inspector would ever permit a visa unless there's some kind of piecework payment system or a really good non-retribution system (anonymity?). If a terrorist ever got past them, there would be demands for punishment. Therefore "the system" is going to select for inspectors who are either reckless, careless, actively working against the interests of the USA... None of which will probably have ideal outcomes.
    - morganwilde 13y ago
      OK, then explain the Tsarnajevs (the Boston bombers) getting past even with multiple terrorist flags? If the system is stonewalling and so tight, then why were they successful in going to terrorist camps and then coming back?
    - monsterix 13y ago
      That's a very interesting perspective, up-voted! The current process acknowledges the fact that there will be a number of false positives, probably an order of magnitude higher than true positives - a class of people which the system aims to filter impeccably. However, we should not forget about the sentiment this process brings about. It leaves a very poor taste and even hurts and insults a lot of people and the cost of losing those talent and taxes thereof could be manifold.
    - rossjudson 13y ago
      You are completely ignoring the negative effects of these decisions to exclude. Those decisions do not happen in a vacuum. Every one of them has an associated "negative" effect that also accumulates.
- mathattack 13y ago
  It would be great to know the full story. Unfortunately, if it has to do with national security, we probably will never know.
- mikeash 13y ago
  The problem is that there is no due process for these things. You're always playing a bit of a lottery whenever you interact with, well, just about anything. But when domestic police screw up (or not!) and you get in trouble, there's at least a process in place that tries to smooth things out. It's still not a guarantee, but if you didn't actually do anything wrong, the process makes a decent stab at ensuring that fact comes to light. But start crossing a border and everything changes. A single wage slave having a bad day can ruin you. Low-level consulate worker decided you screwed something up, even though you think you didn't? Well, too bad. Go find another country to live in. For whatever reason, we completely throw out all these principles the moment we look at people crossing a border. And worse, everyone thinks this is fine. Foreigners have to rights, and people seem to think that's how it should be.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    The problem with foreigners having rights is that it goes against very deep principles in the western tradition. If sovereignty means anything, it means the inherent power to create and enforce borders. Its like one of the defining charecteristics of a biological cell: the establishment of an "inside" and an "outside." Subjecting the inherent power of a sovereign entity to control access through its borders to judicial review upsets that dynamic. Should the US treat visitors with respect and make the process of entering and leaving predictable and transparent? Yes. But saying foreigners have due process rights goes beyond should into must. And that is incompatible with our traditional views of sovereignty.
    - kd0amg 13y ago
      What subset of the federal government is considered the sovereign entity here?
    - mikeash 13y ago
      I don't really understand this. Judges are part of the government, so how is allowing judges to actually judge things at the border a violation of sovereignty?
- forgotAgain 13y ago
  Most likely there was a legitimate reason Why make that presumption?
  - lmgftp 13y ago
    Simply because the vast majority of cases regarding visas/entry into the United States are determined by strict procedure and in accordance with the law. So most likely, as in the majority of cases, there is a reason we're not able to see here, for national security or one-sidedness.
    - genwin 13y ago
      With no public oversight there's no guarantee the procedure is in accordance with the law.
    - iskander 13y ago
      I worked at a school with a high percentage of foreign students on F-1 visas. The visa-granting process is much more arbitrary than you imagine. The supposed "strict procedure" is actually filtered through many layers of several partially-communicating bureaucracies. An embassy in particular can approve or reject visa applications without recourse or oversight but Homeland Security can also erect inscrutable obstructions.
- lanaius 13y ago
  I have been told by other foreign graduate students that getting married in another country (possibly even married at all) violates that student visa agreements. One girl is French and marrying an American, she was told that if she goes to France to have a wedding ceremony that she would not be allowed back in to America. This sounds exactly like what happened to this student. It's shameful and bizarre, but it appears like these are the rules however poorly they are communicated (my friend had NO idea as the university filled out her visa application and did so incorrectly 4 years ago).
  - chockablock 13y ago
    Student visas (F1 and J1) are valid only so long as you do not have 'immigrant intent' (as compared to, say, an H-1B, which doesn't have this requirement). Marrying an American (even in another country) can suggest to the DHS that you may actually intend to immigrate to the US after all. At that point, though, you have other options (can apply to be sponsored for a green card by your spouse). I've never heard of student visa problems caused by getting married to a non-American, which seems to be what happened in the case discussed in the OP.
  - yardie 13y ago
    > marrying an American, she was told that if she goes to France to have a wedding ceremony that she would not be allowed back in to America. My cursory reading of the USCIS website tells me her fiance would need to apply for a K1,K3 visa. Being married she is entitled to rights the typical J visa holder does not have. This is where the immigrant/nonimmigrant visa process breaks down. USCIS makes it painfully expensive to change a nonimmigrant visa into an immigrant visa. I guess what they want to avoid is having people jump the greencard queue, and marriage moves you right to the top, by flying in on a tourist visa, find a willing US citizen to marry.
    - shabble 13y ago
      A 'marriage of convenience'[1] in that sort of situation is typically treated as fraud, with potentially high penalties (deportation for the incoming, jail for the citizen). I've heard from more than one recently married couple that they've been separated and intensively interviewed about their personal lives, marriage, and backgrounds. IIRC one was returning to the US, and another was entering Canada. In both cases one of the couple was a native citizen. If that were the actual reason, I'd be surprised if there wasn't a standard form letter or actual reason for denial. I suppose 'Go Away, We Can't Talk About It' might get used in marginal cases or when the appropriate authority can't be bothered doing the actual research. Or they just lost at Top100 Terrorist Names Bingo. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_of_convenience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_of_convenience
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
bernardlunn 13y ago
the best data i can find is here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_foreign-born_population_in_2005 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_foreign-bo...
devon_air 13y ago
I can understand what he's feeling as i'm in a very similar situation. I was offered a job by a San Francisco-based startup in January. I applied for a visa at the local US embassy, the interview went fine and the consular officer said she was happy to approve it but that I had been flagged for an additional background check which should take about two weeks. Five months later and i'm still stuck in "Administrative Processing". All enquiries have come back with a blanket "matter of national security, we can't give any more information" cover. It's extremely frustrating. What makes it even worse is just the incompetence of it all. I have been going back and forth to the US for nearly ten years to see family pretty much every summer without a problem, why am I only now subject to an extremely lengthy background check? My wife quit her job and we gave up our house in anticipation of our move and we've effectively been in limbo since. If anything, the way we've been treated has made me never want to step foot in the US again.
- mbreese 13y ago
  There's a big difference between work visas and tourist visas, to you should expect it to take significantly more time. The fact that the company is a startup probably doesn't help either, since they may not have been around very long. I know that doesn't help, but visa issues are always complicated and there is always risk involved.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- raverbashing 13y ago
  Well, it's not recommended to quit the job before you're sure you can go (securing the visa, etc) I'm not blaming you, but visas have a non trivial chance of being denied
jdmitch 13y ago
...not sure what sort of "moral debt" (second bullet point) Omar had to the country - is there some reason he should have had to contribute anything to the US economy? Its not like the military where you commit to extra years of service for the financial inducements attached to further study. He's probably already contributed more than most Americans just in his research during the years of his PhD. As an American doing a PhD in the UK, I don't feel I owe a "moral debt" to contribute to the economy here when I am done.
- rayiner 13y ago
  Research universities are phenomenally expensive and heavily subsidized creatures. This guy received $250k in government grants that paid his tuition and stipend.
  - RBerenguel 13y ago
    He also devoted all his time and might to do research. It's not like he was sitting staring at a wall
    - alegen 13y ago
      VERY CORRECT! I really wish more people thought like this...
      - RBerenguel 13y ago
        I'm mildly biased (or more precisely, I was more close to the subject), since I was in research until 2 years ago, when my grant ran out. I did have a grant, but in my case it was basically my salary while I was researching and giving occasional teaching. The research group I was in was also given money "for me" to cover my travel expenses and such, but after all, the money for the grant is used in exchange for someone researching (be it as salary, equipment, workshops,) not just flushed down the toilet. But I'm sure you know, also ;)
- muyuu 13y ago
weego 13y ago
Are we going to trawl up and link every single case of someone being denied re-entry to the US? It's just getting rather tedious. Though as the constant karma farming off similarly tedious and usually poorly researched and written blog posts of the last week continues unabated perhaps I am in a minority of readers who gets their news from decent sources and likes to come to HN for interesting technical articles.
- davidw 13y ago
  I think HN is seriously at risk of having jumped the shark for good. This NSA thing blew the lid off - the front page is completely full of articles about politics, with more each day about all kinds of different things. I suppose things may settle down again - they have after other big events, but... I worry, I worry. (And for the record, for those who conflate not wanting to see every article about this with not caring about it - I care about it deeply)
  - sentenza 13y ago
    You might be right, but I have the feeling that something other is at play here too. The PRISM scandal has raised awareness and interest about these things and we are now seeing a suddenly released glut of stuff like this working its way through the system. These things are happening all the time, but I get the feeling that up until now only US-foreigners were aware of the extent of it.
  - irollboozers 13y ago
    I disagree, these are 'big' problems, and exposure of these pain points to other smart entrepreneurs can only lead to a net benefit.
    - davidw 13y ago
      These are political problems that will be fixed by "politics" in its various forms: people making their voices heard, politicians doing their thing, donating money to organizations, lawsuits, stuff like that. Lots of hard work. They will not be fixed because you clicked the 'upvote' arrow on a bunch of stories on a niche site, thinking that "some smart entrepreneur types" will go fix the problem for you.
kohanz 13y ago
Perhaps because recent events have me grasping for sources of positive news from Americans, I am touched by the sincerity and tone of this letter. I would much rather believe that the attitude expressed in this letter is that of most Americans.
- gilgoomesh 13y ago
  Is this most Americans? Yes it is. Americans paid $250 grand for this "Omar, PhD" but their purchase was lost in shipping. It's time to start yelling at a few parcel carriers.
UnoriginalGuy 13y ago
I wonder if this is one of those vague "security" problems. It seems like if people get denied for normal stuff (overstaying, violating their visas, etc) they're told and can at least fight it a little. But when you get a black mark against you it seems like you get stuck in an administrative blackhole where nobody is authorised to tell you WHY or they themselves don't know. It was the same way with the no-fly list for the longest time too, but because that wound up impacting a few powerful Americans it was eventually sorted so now you can at least fight it a little or do additional background checks to get off of it. The worst part is that these security black marks seem fairly easy to get: family member or friend a "terrorist?" Share a name with someone "bad?" You're now on it. And nobody you can actually talk to can either tell you why or has the authority to remove you. I would blame it on bureaucracy, but that is an easy out for a policy which is partly intentional -- Americans don't want people visiting, working, or studying on their shores. They have made that abundantly clear over the last ten years.
- TylerE 13y ago
  It's actually good security practice. If the terrorist's find out they got flagged because of X, now they know not to do X any more.
  - betterunix 13y ago
    It also has the unfortunate side effect of leaving innocent people completely confused when they get flagged, because they have no idea what they did wrong nor any way to defend themselves. America is not supposed to be a country where people are punished for mysterious reasons, not even foreigners.
  - EliRivers 13y ago
    Surely we want them to stop doing bad things? :p
    - TylerE 13y ago
      Yes, but this will stop them from doing EASY TO CATCH bad things. It's like anti-bacterial soap. Think about how badass that 0.1% that ISN'T killed is.
johnnyg 13y ago
Unless you walked through Alaska on a land bridge, you too are an immigrant. We can either embrace the strength of a democracy to turn the huddled masses into a productive force for good or we can choose to turn inward. Guided by fear, we are making the wrong choice.
- gilgoomesh 13y ago
  > Unless you walked through Alaska on a land bridge, you too are an immigrant. Uh... isn't that also immigration?
  - CaveTech 13y ago
    In this instance, it would be migration not immigration.
  - morganwilde 13y ago
    To extend this line of thinking - you are (possibly) not an immigrant only if you were born in Africa - our place of origin.
    - astrodust 13y ago
      Even "origin" is a misnomer here. It's not clear if the neanderthals were wiped out, or simply assimilated. Many were already living in modern-day Europe.
  - nitid_name 13y ago
    Perhaps the OP is implying that without previous population, the first peoples of the Americas were settlers, not colonizers or immigrants.
- Thrymr 13y ago
  "Immigrant" does not mean "descended from someone who came here". Some people were actually born here. Yes, we are all descended from immigrants (some of us from those who walked from Asia), but that doesn't make us and our children's children "immigrants" as well.
lquist 13y ago
America when will you be angelic? When will you take off your clothes? When will you look at yourself through the grave? When will you be worthy of your million Trotskyites? America why are your libraries full of tears? America when will you send your eggs to India? I'm sick of your insane demands. From Ginsberg's "America" (http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88/america.html http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88/america.html)
- cema 13y ago
  Uh... what?
outworlder 13y ago
Well, this "problem" with sort out itself, eventually. Taking the ridiculous border controls, the economic situation, disregard of human rights (specially for foreigners), it means that the US is rapidly becoming an unattractive place to work, study and even go on vacation. Before long, you won't have many people trying to get in. Guess where the entrepreneurs, scientists and highly skilled workers will go? Hint: not the US. What that means for the future of the country is left as an exercise to the reader. I can't believe that in 2013 we are still worried about which piece of land someone were when he got out of the womb.
- twoodfin 13y ago
  Before long, you won't have many people trying to get in. Wanna bet?
  - outworlder 13y ago
    Sure! Are there any reliable sources of immigration statistics? The effects might take a while to be felt. Some green card categories have a backlog of more than a decade. Tourism might be easier to measure.
    - cunac 13y ago
      the fact that H1B yearly quota is used in hours ?
- avaku 13y ago
  That's why I left US for the UK back in 2006. (Even though UK now is not better than US, at the time they were able to recognise the benefits of letting highly skilled people in).
untog 13y ago
As an immigrant in the US, watching HN lately has been enlightening. Absolutely none of this is new- and it's also almost entirely unrelated to PRISM. Despite the fact that tech companies have been struggling with insane visa rules for years, it's only now that we start posting about individual injustices, now that we can file it under the banner of "government bad"?
- piqufoh 13y ago
  Why would this be unrelated to PRISM? As this guy doesn't know what he's accused of, and we have no idea what PRISM is looking for, assuming they're unrelated is as fallacious as assuming they are related.
  - untog 13y ago
    My cable internet got cut off 48 hours ago. I'm still doing a merry jig with Time Warner to work out why. So it was probably PRISM, right? The NSA saw that I was posing about PRISM online and immediately moved to sever my connection to the outside world. There is zero evidence to link Omar's case with PRISM- especially as the events described started over a year and a half ago. I am not "assuming" that it is unrelated, I am making a decision based on the fact that there is no evidence linking the two. When such evidence arises, I'll re-examine my opinion. But assuming that everything is related to PRISM because it involves computers and/or the government is a slippery slope into tin foil hatted-ness.
  - JOnAgain 13y ago
    The kind of thing that this article described happened all the time before anyone knew about prism. It just never got much publicity.
  - army 13y ago
    This sort of stuff has been happening forever. I'm sure if you found some people who were international students in the 80s or 90s they would have similar stories about capriciousness with regards to student visas. The rules basically say that embassy official should only give out student visas if they are confident that the student meets the terms of the visa, particularly that they have no intent to overstay or permanently immigrate to the U.S. I.e. the default is not granting the visa, rather than granting the visa. The rules are bizarre: while you're on a non-immigrant visa you have to prove that you have no intent to immigrate or seek immigrant status, yet ultimately many people will seek green cards. Indeed, there is plenty of talk that the U.S. should actively seek to encourage international students to stay permanently, while at the same time the rules say that visas shouldn't be granted to international students who might possibly be considering staying permanently.
slaxman 13y ago
Wow! This really saddens me. But I experienced something similar. When I got married a couple of years ago (in India) I really wanted my one cousins (who I was really close to) to come to my wedding. Unfortunately, his lawyers advised him no to come stating that given the current state of affairs, his reentry to US might be jeopardized. This is in spite of the fact that he had lived in US for over a decade and paid huge taxes during that time.
OldSchool 13y ago
He sounds like a brilliant student. However does anyone find it the least bit noteworthy that the US government is paying for foreign citizens' tuition and stipends while many of its own citizens are forced to go deeply in debt?
- xanmas 13y ago
  PhD students, especially in the sciences, don't pay tuition.
  - genwin 13y ago
    Nice to know my taxes pay for the lofty education of people who may have no intention of working in my country.
    - cema 13y ago
      They may have an intention. But few means, since there is no easy way from graduation to the citizenship. A positive side effect may be more foreigners having good will towards Americans, having studied and lived here for several years. However, incidents like this one (denying visa) are not working towards developing the good will but very much in the other direction.
    - john_b 13y ago
      Your taxes also pay--though usually not completely--for the aimless four year party that constitutes many college students' experience in higher education. Given the ratio of undergraduates to science & engineering PhD students, I'd wager that the former consumes a much larger portion of your taxes than the latter, and for less return on the investment. Not to mention the fact that many foreign PhD students have strong desires to live and work here...but Uncle Sam apparently thinks it's better to shove them out.
      - genwin 13y ago
        I shouldn't be concerned about wastage in one area because there's wastage in another area? Doesn't compute. > Not to mention the fact that many foreign PhD students have strong desires to live and work here...but Uncle Sam apparently thinks it's better to shove them out. Yes, I believe this. As long as Uncle Sam is cutting off its nose to spite its face, maybe we shouldn't be educating these foreign students. Maybe wait until Uncle Sam is smart enough to first give the students a green card.
Mithaldu 13y ago
The one thing I'm taking home from that letter is this: the embassy called him back to say that they had found the problem. They said that if he came in, they would fix it. Instead of fixing it, they stamped CANCELED across his student visa without explaining what was wrong, and refused to answer any questions as to why. In short: The american embassy has no compunctions whatsoever to lie to citizens of other countries. For me as citizen of another country, this means that i will need to treat anything any representative of the US-american government says, no matter how high, or more importantly, low they are on the totem pole, is highly subject and likely a lie.
- betterunix 13y ago
  Nothing special here -- law enforcement agencies in the USA are allowed to lie to people like this as well. There is a reason defense attorneys here keep telling people that if they are ever arrested they should say nothing until a lawyer is present. Somewhere on Youtube there is a video where a former cop describes how he once told some kid that he should write an apology letter to the family he stole from, and the cop would deliver it; that "apology letter" was presented as evidence in court, as a confession. Trickery is a matter of course for the US government, at basically every level.
- piqufoh 13y ago
  This part is breathtakingly bad, but also largely subjective - we may never know what they really said...
  - johnyzee 13y ago
    If only we had records...
    - balabaster 13y ago
      1). LOL 2). They did fix it - they stamped cancelled on a visa the guy (allegedly) shouldn't have. Fixed. Seems to me, that's the American way, no? :P
pseut 13y ago
This sort of event is shameful and near-indefensible but not new. If you're a foreign grad student in the US, be aware that this sort of thing happens all the time, and even trivial visa issues take a long time to resolve.
pfortuny 13y ago
When the US has access to approx 10 billion 'metadata' from Jordanian citicens (probably more, I am quoting from memory), it means it has access to ALL their communications. So if this poor man just happened to have the wrong social graph... "We found the problem with your visa [silence]". The [silence] means: there should be a 'CANCELLED' stamp on it. Why bother?
genwin 13y ago
My taxes pay for the expensive university education of foreigners, without guarantee they can stay? Great.
- astrodust 13y ago
  Many, if not most developed countries do this. Don't be such a jackass. The idea is that these students enrich the university, and there's a chance they'll stay on as professors. Billions are spent chasing foreign students that can throw a football and you chose to save your rage for this?
  - genwin 13y ago
    It's hardly being a jackass to wish that my taxes weren't wasted, in any way whatsoever.
    - astrodust 13y ago
      It's not like you're footing the bill for all foreign students single-handedly. There's this thing called society. You're part of it. If you think your taxes are being "wasted" on foreign students, as if those freeloaders are being forced on institutions like MIT by the government, take it up with your representative or senator. The academic world is bigger than the US. It might shock you but there are some very capable students outside those borders and MIT would very much like to have them doing research at MIT rather than somewhere else.
      - genwin 13y ago
        Then let MIT pay for that, not me, when there's no likelihood the student will be paying me back in the form of US taxes. The research leads to patents that MIT gets compensated for, not me. My taxes are likely being wasted here, working against the society I support. It doesn't matter if it's only a dime of mine since all waste is bad and adds up to a lot. No I'm not going to take it up with my representative, falling on deaf ears. I'm going to make my point here on HN instead, where it belongs.
amasad 13y ago
The bit about the flight staff tearing up his ticket is a real problem. Flight staff act like they're Border Control. I'm a Jordanian with an O1 and they usually give me hard time when I try to board a plane to the states. I once almost missed my flight because they made me buy a ticket back in the same year, even-though my visa was valid for three years.
- hpagey 13y ago
  According to my understanding, for passport control flights, the airlines are heavily fined and have to bear the cost of return flight if a passenger is denied entry.
ekm2 13y ago
What is a foreign graduate student in the US supposed to learn from this? That he or she should not fall in love or marry an American while in the US? or That if this happens he or she should not go back to renew the visa ?
- smackfu 13y ago
  That every time you leave the country, there is a risk you may not be let back in.
mmmelissa 13y ago
What a top notch grad supervisor to write a letter like that.
maguirre 13y ago
This article strikes home for me. I came to the US to go to college, while here I got great grades, a job and eventually married a US Citizen and obtained citizenship myself. Due to the fact that I followed the rules My sister (Medical Doctor in our country of origin) would get harassed and accused of wanting to stay ("like your brother" they would say) every time she came to visit me (For the record she has never overstayed her visas). Eventually when it was time to renew her tourist visa she was denied and told to never set a foot at the US embassy again. Quite sad really but there is no winning against USCIS.
reccles 13y ago
Having been through the system I can probably guess what he did wrong. F1 status requires that you show no intent to stay. If he had declared that Microsoft was sponsoring an H1B prior to re-entry and we as attempting to enter with a F1, then he broke the F1 rules. If you break any rules you are pretty much SOL.
peripetylabs 13y ago
He probably pissed off some member of the royal family, whom are more important to the US than intellectuals.

500 points by denzil_correa 13y ago

Their decision was probably based in some way (assuming it's based on available information, which is admittedly risky) in his marriage to a foreign national while expressing interest in moving to the states, and the embassy's reluctance to chance him violating his visa permissions and in some way moving here with his wife in a permanent resident-alien w/o a visa type manner. Not claiming to know anything special, but if that really is the only perturbed variable, it most likely hinged on that. Or familial ties that are somehow inscrutable. All conjecture, but I find these single cases to be ridiculous, because there are competent individuals in government who oft do what they're supposed to, even if the whole government mechanism appears corrupt and broken. Most likely there was a legitimate reason, and of course we only have one side of the story here, by an associate professor and his PhD student.

monsterix 13y ago
> but I find these single cases to be ridiculous, because there are competent individuals in government who oft do what they're supposed to, even if the whole government mechanism appears corrupt and broken. Most likely there was a legitimate reason, and of course we only have one side of the story here, by an associate professor and his PhD student. You'll understand only when you face it. What legitimate reasons are you applying to justify treatment of any or every person on the planet as potential threat? Without a means for recourse. And then if you're agreeable to the logic of scrutiny and transparency from others then why not apply the same logic to the individuals in the Government?
- VLM 13y ago
  "What legitimate reasons are you applying to justify treatment of any or every person on the planet as potential threat" Because they are? Approximately zero risk, true, but slightly over zero. Its a pretty simple straightforward game theory problem. Whats the total aggregate sum of the trouble you'll get into by letting 1 out of 100 million terrorist thru, vs simply stamping "denied national security" on any random visa and stonewalling? In fact the guy who dared complain about it is probably now on some secret NSA list, and perhaps also now on the no-fly list. That'll show people what happens to complainers, hopefully that prof never has to fly anywhere again for the rest of his life... and probably his families lives, too. Note, I'm not supporting an unjust system, just explaining how it works from a game theory perspective. I don't see why any individual inspector would ever permit a visa unless there's some kind of piecework payment system or a really good non-retribution system (anonymity?). If a terrorist ever got past them, there would be demands for punishment. Therefore "the system" is going to select for inspectors who are either reckless, careless, actively working against the interests of the USA... None of which will probably have ideal outcomes.
  - morganwilde 13y ago
    OK, then explain the Tsarnajevs (the Boston bombers) getting past even with multiple terrorist flags? If the system is stonewalling and so tight, then why were they successful in going to terrorist camps and then coming back?
  - monsterix 13y ago
    That's a very interesting perspective, up-voted! The current process acknowledges the fact that there will be a number of false positives, probably an order of magnitude higher than true positives - a class of people which the system aims to filter impeccably. However, we should not forget about the sentiment this process brings about. It leaves a very poor taste and even hurts and insults a lot of people and the cost of losing those talent and taxes thereof could be manifold.
  - rossjudson 13y ago
    You are completely ignoring the negative effects of these decisions to exclude. Those decisions do not happen in a vacuum. Every one of them has an associated "negative" effect that also accumulates.
mathattack 13y ago
It would be great to know the full story. Unfortunately, if it has to do with national security, we probably will never know.
mikeash 13y ago
The problem is that there is no due process for these things. You're always playing a bit of a lottery whenever you interact with, well, just about anything. But when domestic police screw up (or not!) and you get in trouble, there's at least a process in place that tries to smooth things out. It's still not a guarantee, but if you didn't actually do anything wrong, the process makes a decent stab at ensuring that fact comes to light. But start crossing a border and everything changes. A single wage slave having a bad day can ruin you. Low-level consulate worker decided you screwed something up, even though you think you didn't? Well, too bad. Go find another country to live in. For whatever reason, we completely throw out all these principles the moment we look at people crossing a border. And worse, everyone thinks this is fine. Foreigners have to rights, and people seem to think that's how it should be.
- rayiner 13y ago
  The problem with foreigners having rights is that it goes against very deep principles in the western tradition. If sovereignty means anything, it means the inherent power to create and enforce borders. Its like one of the defining charecteristics of a biological cell: the establishment of an "inside" and an "outside." Subjecting the inherent power of a sovereign entity to control access through its borders to judicial review upsets that dynamic. Should the US treat visitors with respect and make the process of entering and leaving predictable and transparent? Yes. But saying foreigners have due process rights goes beyond should into must. And that is incompatible with our traditional views of sovereignty.
  - kd0amg 13y ago
    What subset of the federal government is considered the sovereign entity here?
  - mikeash 13y ago
    I don't really understand this. Judges are part of the government, so how is allowing judges to actually judge things at the border a violation of sovereignty?
forgotAgain 13y ago
Most likely there was a legitimate reason Why make that presumption?
- lmgftp 13y ago
  Simply because the vast majority of cases regarding visas/entry into the United States are determined by strict procedure and in accordance with the law. So most likely, as in the majority of cases, there is a reason we're not able to see here, for national security or one-sidedness.
  - genwin 13y ago
    With no public oversight there's no guarantee the procedure is in accordance with the law.
  - iskander 13y ago
    I worked at a school with a high percentage of foreign students on F-1 visas. The visa-granting process is much more arbitrary than you imagine. The supposed "strict procedure" is actually filtered through many layers of several partially-communicating bureaucracies. An embassy in particular can approve or reject visa applications without recourse or oversight but Homeland Security can also erect inscrutable obstructions.
lanaius 13y ago
I have been told by other foreign graduate students that getting married in another country (possibly even married at all) violates that student visa agreements. One girl is French and marrying an American, she was told that if she goes to France to have a wedding ceremony that she would not be allowed back in to America. This sounds exactly like what happened to this student. It's shameful and bizarre, but it appears like these are the rules however poorly they are communicated (my friend had NO idea as the university filled out her visa application and did so incorrectly 4 years ago).
- chockablock 13y ago
  Student visas (F1 and J1) are valid only so long as you do not have 'immigrant intent' (as compared to, say, an H-1B, which doesn't have this requirement). Marrying an American (even in another country) can suggest to the DHS that you may actually intend to immigrate to the US after all. At that point, though, you have other options (can apply to be sponsored for a green card by your spouse). I've never heard of student visa problems caused by getting married to a non-American, which seems to be what happened in the case discussed in the OP.
- yardie 13y ago
  > marrying an American, she was told that if she goes to France to have a wedding ceremony that she would not be allowed back in to America. My cursory reading of the USCIS website tells me her fiance would need to apply for a K1,K3 visa. Being married she is entitled to rights the typical J visa holder does not have. This is where the immigrant/nonimmigrant visa process breaks down. USCIS makes it painfully expensive to change a nonimmigrant visa into an immigrant visa. I guess what they want to avoid is having people jump the greencard queue, and marriage moves you right to the top, by flying in on a tourist visa, find a willing US citizen to marry.
  - shabble 13y ago
    A 'marriage of convenience'[1] in that sort of situation is typically treated as fraud, with potentially high penalties (deportation for the incoming, jail for the citizen). I've heard from more than one recently married couple that they've been separated and intensively interviewed about their personal lives, marriage, and backgrounds. IIRC one was returning to the US, and another was entering Canada. In both cases one of the couple was a native citizen. If that were the actual reason, I'd be surprised if there wasn't a standard form letter or actual reason for denial. I suppose 'Go Away, We Can't Talk About It' might get used in marginal cases or when the appropriate authority can't be bothered doing the actual research. Or they just lost at Top100 Terrorist Names Bingo. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_of_convenience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_of_convenience

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

bernardlunn 13y ago

the best data i can find is here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_foreign-born_population_in_2005 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_foreign-bo...

devon_air 13y ago

I can understand what he's feeling as i'm in a very similar situation. I was offered a job by a San Francisco-based startup in January. I applied for a visa at the local US embassy, the interview went fine and the consular officer said she was happy to approve it but that I had been flagged for an additional background check which should take about two weeks. Five months later and i'm still stuck in "Administrative Processing". All enquiries have come back with a blanket "matter of national security, we can't give any more information" cover. It's extremely frustrating. What makes it even worse is just the incompetence of it all. I have been going back and forth to the US for nearly ten years to see family pretty much every summer without a problem, why am I only now subject to an extremely lengthy background check? My wife quit her job and we gave up our house in anticipation of our move and we've effectively been in limbo since. If anything, the way we've been treated has made me never want to step foot in the US again.

mbreese 13y ago
There's a big difference between work visas and tourist visas, to you should expect it to take significantly more time. The fact that the company is a startup probably doesn't help either, since they may not have been around very long. I know that doesn't help, but visa issues are always complicated and there is always risk involved.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
raverbashing 13y ago
Well, it's not recommended to quit the job before you're sure you can go (securing the visa, etc) I'm not blaming you, but visas have a non trivial chance of being denied

jdmitch 13y ago

...not sure what sort of "moral debt" (second bullet point) Omar had to the country - is there some reason he should have had to contribute anything to the US economy? Its not like the military where you commit to extra years of service for the financial inducements attached to further study. He's probably already contributed more than most Americans just in his research during the years of his PhD. As an American doing a PhD in the UK, I don't feel I owe a "moral debt" to contribute to the economy here when I am done.

rayiner 13y ago
Research universities are phenomenally expensive and heavily subsidized creatures. This guy received $250k in government grants that paid his tuition and stipend.
- RBerenguel 13y ago
  He also devoted all his time and might to do research. It's not like he was sitting staring at a wall
  - alegen 13y ago
    VERY CORRECT! I really wish more people thought like this...
    - RBerenguel 13y ago
      I'm mildly biased (or more precisely, I was more close to the subject), since I was in research until 2 years ago, when my grant ran out. I did have a grant, but in my case it was basically my salary while I was researching and giving occasional teaching. The research group I was in was also given money "for me" to cover my travel expenses and such, but after all, the money for the grant is used in exchange for someone researching (be it as salary, equipment, workshops,) not just flushed down the toilet. But I'm sure you know, also ;)
muyuu 13y ago

weego 13y ago

Are we going to trawl up and link every single case of someone being denied re-entry to the US? It's just getting rather tedious. Though as the constant karma farming off similarly tedious and usually poorly researched and written blog posts of the last week continues unabated perhaps I am in a minority of readers who gets their news from decent sources and likes to come to HN for interesting technical articles.

davidw 13y ago
I think HN is seriously at risk of having jumped the shark for good. This NSA thing blew the lid off - the front page is completely full of articles about politics, with more each day about all kinds of different things. I suppose things may settle down again - they have after other big events, but... I worry, I worry. (And for the record, for those who conflate not wanting to see every article about this with not caring about it - I care about it deeply)
- sentenza 13y ago
  You might be right, but I have the feeling that something other is at play here too. The PRISM scandal has raised awareness and interest about these things and we are now seeing a suddenly released glut of stuff like this working its way through the system. These things are happening all the time, but I get the feeling that up until now only US-foreigners were aware of the extent of it.
- irollboozers 13y ago
  I disagree, these are 'big' problems, and exposure of these pain points to other smart entrepreneurs can only lead to a net benefit.
  - davidw 13y ago
    These are political problems that will be fixed by "politics" in its various forms: people making their voices heard, politicians doing their thing, donating money to organizations, lawsuits, stuff like that. Lots of hard work. They will not be fixed because you clicked the 'upvote' arrow on a bunch of stories on a niche site, thinking that "some smart entrepreneur types" will go fix the problem for you.

kohanz 13y ago

Perhaps because recent events have me grasping for sources of positive news from Americans, I am touched by the sincerity and tone of this letter. I would much rather believe that the attitude expressed in this letter is that of most Americans.

gilgoomesh 13y ago
Is this most Americans? Yes it is. Americans paid $250 grand for this "Omar, PhD" but their purchase was lost in shipping. It's time to start yelling at a few parcel carriers.

UnoriginalGuy 13y ago

I wonder if this is one of those vague "security" problems. It seems like if people get denied for normal stuff (overstaying, violating their visas, etc) they're told and can at least fight it a little. But when you get a black mark against you it seems like you get stuck in an administrative blackhole where nobody is authorised to tell you WHY or they themselves don't know. It was the same way with the no-fly list for the longest time too, but because that wound up impacting a few powerful Americans it was eventually sorted so now you can at least fight it a little or do additional background checks to get off of it. The worst part is that these security black marks seem fairly easy to get: family member or friend a "terrorist?" Share a name with someone "bad?" You're now on it. And nobody you can actually talk to can either tell you why or has the authority to remove you. I would blame it on bureaucracy, but that is an easy out for a policy which is partly intentional -- Americans don't want people visiting, working, or studying on their shores. They have made that abundantly clear over the last ten years.

TylerE 13y ago
It's actually good security practice. If the terrorist's find out they got flagged because of X, now they know not to do X any more.
- betterunix 13y ago
  It also has the unfortunate side effect of leaving innocent people completely confused when they get flagged, because they have no idea what they did wrong nor any way to defend themselves. America is not supposed to be a country where people are punished for mysterious reasons, not even foreigners.
- EliRivers 13y ago
  Surely we want them to stop doing bad things? :p
  - TylerE 13y ago
    Yes, but this will stop them from doing EASY TO CATCH bad things. It's like anti-bacterial soap. Think about how badass that 0.1% that ISN'T killed is.

johnnyg 13y ago

Unless you walked through Alaska on a land bridge, you too are an immigrant. We can either embrace the strength of a democracy to turn the huddled masses into a productive force for good or we can choose to turn inward. Guided by fear, we are making the wrong choice.

gilgoomesh 13y ago
> Unless you walked through Alaska on a land bridge, you too are an immigrant. Uh... isn't that also immigration?
- CaveTech 13y ago
  In this instance, it would be migration not immigration.
- morganwilde 13y ago
  To extend this line of thinking - you are (possibly) not an immigrant only if you were born in Africa - our place of origin.
  - astrodust 13y ago
    Even "origin" is a misnomer here. It's not clear if the neanderthals were wiped out, or simply assimilated. Many were already living in modern-day Europe.
- nitid_name 13y ago
  Perhaps the OP is implying that without previous population, the first peoples of the Americas were settlers, not colonizers or immigrants.
Thrymr 13y ago
"Immigrant" does not mean "descended from someone who came here". Some people were actually born here. Yes, we are all descended from immigrants (some of us from those who walked from Asia), but that doesn't make us and our children's children "immigrants" as well.

lquist 13y ago

America when will you be angelic? When will you take off your clothes? When will you look at yourself through the grave? When will you be worthy of your million Trotskyites? America why are your libraries full of tears? America when will you send your eggs to India? I'm sick of your insane demands. From Ginsberg's "America" (http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88/america.html http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88/america.html)

cema 13y ago
Uh... what?

outworlder 13y ago

Well, this "problem" with sort out itself, eventually. Taking the ridiculous border controls, the economic situation, disregard of human rights (specially for foreigners), it means that the US is rapidly becoming an unattractive place to work, study and even go on vacation. Before long, you won't have many people trying to get in. Guess where the entrepreneurs, scientists and highly skilled workers will go? Hint: not the US. What that means for the future of the country is left as an exercise to the reader. I can't believe that in 2013 we are still worried about which piece of land someone were when he got out of the womb.

twoodfin 13y ago
Before long, you won't have many people trying to get in. Wanna bet?
- outworlder 13y ago
  Sure! Are there any reliable sources of immigration statistics? The effects might take a while to be felt. Some green card categories have a backlog of more than a decade. Tourism might be easier to measure.
  - cunac 13y ago
    the fact that H1B yearly quota is used in hours ?
avaku 13y ago
That's why I left US for the UK back in 2006. (Even though UK now is not better than US, at the time they were able to recognise the benefits of letting highly skilled people in).

untog 13y ago

As an immigrant in the US, watching HN lately has been enlightening. Absolutely none of this is new- and it's also almost entirely unrelated to PRISM. Despite the fact that tech companies have been struggling with insane visa rules for years, it's only now that we start posting about individual injustices, now that we can file it under the banner of "government bad"?

piqufoh 13y ago
Why would this be unrelated to PRISM? As this guy doesn't know what he's accused of, and we have no idea what PRISM is looking for, assuming they're unrelated is as fallacious as assuming they are related.
- untog 13y ago
  My cable internet got cut off 48 hours ago. I'm still doing a merry jig with Time Warner to work out why. So it was probably PRISM, right? The NSA saw that I was posing about PRISM online and immediately moved to sever my connection to the outside world. There is zero evidence to link Omar's case with PRISM- especially as the events described started over a year and a half ago. I am not "assuming" that it is unrelated, I am making a decision based on the fact that there is no evidence linking the two. When such evidence arises, I'll re-examine my opinion. But assuming that everything is related to PRISM because it involves computers and/or the government is a slippery slope into tin foil hatted-ness.
- JOnAgain 13y ago
  The kind of thing that this article described happened all the time before anyone knew about prism. It just never got much publicity.
- army 13y ago
  This sort of stuff has been happening forever. I'm sure if you found some people who were international students in the 80s or 90s they would have similar stories about capriciousness with regards to student visas. The rules basically say that embassy official should only give out student visas if they are confident that the student meets the terms of the visa, particularly that they have no intent to overstay or permanently immigrate to the U.S. I.e. the default is not granting the visa, rather than granting the visa. The rules are bizarre: while you're on a non-immigrant visa you have to prove that you have no intent to immigrate or seek immigrant status, yet ultimately many people will seek green cards. Indeed, there is plenty of talk that the U.S. should actively seek to encourage international students to stay permanently, while at the same time the rules say that visas shouldn't be granted to international students who might possibly be considering staying permanently.

slaxman 13y ago

Wow! This really saddens me. But I experienced something similar. When I got married a couple of years ago (in India) I really wanted my one cousins (who I was really close to) to come to my wedding. Unfortunately, his lawyers advised him no to come stating that given the current state of affairs, his reentry to US might be jeopardized. This is in spite of the fact that he had lived in US for over a decade and paid huge taxes during that time.

OldSchool 13y ago

He sounds like a brilliant student. However does anyone find it the least bit noteworthy that the US government is paying for foreign citizens' tuition and stipends while many of its own citizens are forced to go deeply in debt?

xanmas 13y ago
PhD students, especially in the sciences, don't pay tuition.
- genwin 13y ago
  Nice to know my taxes pay for the lofty education of people who may have no intention of working in my country.
  - cema 13y ago
    They may have an intention. But few means, since there is no easy way from graduation to the citizenship. A positive side effect may be more foreigners having good will towards Americans, having studied and lived here for several years. However, incidents like this one (denying visa) are not working towards developing the good will but very much in the other direction.
  - john_b 13y ago
    Your taxes also pay--though usually not completely--for the aimless four year party that constitutes many college students' experience in higher education. Given the ratio of undergraduates to science & engineering PhD students, I'd wager that the former consumes a much larger portion of your taxes than the latter, and for less return on the investment. Not to mention the fact that many foreign PhD students have strong desires to live and work here...but Uncle Sam apparently thinks it's better to shove them out.
    - genwin 13y ago
      I shouldn't be concerned about wastage in one area because there's wastage in another area? Doesn't compute. > Not to mention the fact that many foreign PhD students have strong desires to live and work here...but Uncle Sam apparently thinks it's better to shove them out. Yes, I believe this. As long as Uncle Sam is cutting off its nose to spite its face, maybe we shouldn't be educating these foreign students. Maybe wait until Uncle Sam is smart enough to first give the students a green card.

Mithaldu 13y ago

The one thing I'm taking home from that letter is this: the embassy called him back to say that they had found the problem. They said that if he came in, they would fix it. Instead of fixing it, they stamped CANCELED across his student visa without explaining what was wrong, and refused to answer any questions as to why. In short: The american embassy has no compunctions whatsoever to lie to citizens of other countries. For me as citizen of another country, this means that i will need to treat anything any representative of the US-american government says, no matter how high, or more importantly, low they are on the totem pole, is highly subject and likely a lie.

betterunix 13y ago
Nothing special here -- law enforcement agencies in the USA are allowed to lie to people like this as well. There is a reason defense attorneys here keep telling people that if they are ever arrested they should say nothing until a lawyer is present. Somewhere on Youtube there is a video where a former cop describes how he once told some kid that he should write an apology letter to the family he stole from, and the cop would deliver it; that "apology letter" was presented as evidence in court, as a confession. Trickery is a matter of course for the US government, at basically every level.
piqufoh 13y ago
This part is breathtakingly bad, but also largely subjective - we may never know what they really said...
- johnyzee 13y ago
  If only we had records...
  - balabaster 13y ago
    1). LOL 2). They did fix it - they stamped cancelled on a visa the guy (allegedly) shouldn't have. Fixed. Seems to me, that's the American way, no? :P

pseut 13y ago

This sort of event is shameful and near-indefensible but not new. If you're a foreign grad student in the US, be aware that this sort of thing happens all the time, and even trivial visa issues take a long time to resolve.

pfortuny 13y ago

When the US has access to approx 10 billion 'metadata' from Jordanian citicens (probably more, I am quoting from memory), it means it has access to ALL their communications. So if this poor man just happened to have the wrong social graph... "We found the problem with your visa [silence]". The [silence] means: there should be a 'CANCELLED' stamp on it. Why bother?

genwin 13y ago

My taxes pay for the expensive university education of foreigners, without guarantee they can stay? Great.

astrodust 13y ago
Many, if not most developed countries do this. Don't be such a jackass. The idea is that these students enrich the university, and there's a chance they'll stay on as professors. Billions are spent chasing foreign students that can throw a football and you chose to save your rage for this?
- genwin 13y ago
  It's hardly being a jackass to wish that my taxes weren't wasted, in any way whatsoever.
  - astrodust 13y ago
    It's not like you're footing the bill for all foreign students single-handedly. There's this thing called society. You're part of it. If you think your taxes are being "wasted" on foreign students, as if those freeloaders are being forced on institutions like MIT by the government, take it up with your representative or senator. The academic world is bigger than the US. It might shock you but there are some very capable students outside those borders and MIT would very much like to have them doing research at MIT rather than somewhere else.
    - genwin 13y ago
      Then let MIT pay for that, not me, when there's no likelihood the student will be paying me back in the form of US taxes. The research leads to patents that MIT gets compensated for, not me. My taxes are likely being wasted here, working against the society I support. It doesn't matter if it's only a dime of mine since all waste is bad and adds up to a lot. No I'm not going to take it up with my representative, falling on deaf ears. I'm going to make my point here on HN instead, where it belongs.

amasad 13y ago

The bit about the flight staff tearing up his ticket is a real problem. Flight staff act like they're Border Control. I'm a Jordanian with an O1 and they usually give me hard time when I try to board a plane to the states. I once almost missed my flight because they made me buy a ticket back in the same year, even-though my visa was valid for three years.

hpagey 13y ago
According to my understanding, for passport control flights, the airlines are heavily fined and have to bear the cost of return flight if a passenger is denied entry.

ekm2 13y ago

What is a foreign graduate student in the US supposed to learn from this? That he or she should not fall in love or marry an American while in the US? or That if this happens he or she should not go back to renew the visa ?

smackfu 13y ago
That every time you leave the country, there is a risk you may not be let back in.

mmmelissa 13y ago

What a top notch grad supervisor to write a letter like that.

maguirre 13y ago

This article strikes home for me. I came to the US to go to college, while here I got great grades, a job and eventually married a US Citizen and obtained citizenship myself. Due to the fact that I followed the rules My sister (Medical Doctor in our country of origin) would get harassed and accused of wanting to stay ("like your brother" they would say) every time she came to visit me (For the record she has never overstayed her visas). Eventually when it was time to renew her tourist visa she was denied and told to never set a foot at the US embassy again. Quite sad really but there is no winning against USCIS.

reccles 13y ago

Having been through the system I can probably guess what he did wrong. F1 status requires that you show no intent to stay. If he had declared that Microsoft was sponsoring an H1B prior to re-entry and we as attempting to enter with a F1, then he broke the F1 rules. If you break any rules you are pretty much SOL.

peripetylabs 13y ago

He probably pissed off some member of the royal family, whom are more important to the US than intellectuals.