Hacker News Reader

Comment by Tortoise | Hacker News Reader

So I spent about 60 seconds doing research. The J-1 visa they initially applied for is a work visa (or study visa). The ETSA they came on is for visa-waiver (tourism.) Most countries are going to be very unhappy if you apply for a work visa, don't get it, then show up anyway and say you're just a tourist. Non unreasonably, they assume you're lying. This isn't just a US thing.

View on HN

It seems that your 60 second research missed the point that the ESTA is also valid for business purposes.

https://esta.cbp.dhs.gov/esta/

And the fact that you cannot ask for ESTA if you already asked for a J1 is not explained in that site.

Besides it is crazy that instead of displaying an error when they asked for the ESTA, they were put in jail for 33 hours. The worse part is that some people do not see anything wrong with that...

Sorry - your response doesn't cut it. The ETSA and the J-1 infrastructure obviously can talk - how else would the border agent know to arrest you? If it can talk, then why doesn't it tell you that you're breaking the law, if it's so gosh-darn clear with 60 seconds of research? Remember - you're a local. Tourists are not.

Potential tourists see these articles and factor them into their travel plans, usually by not going to the country in question. If it was Venezuela putting people in prison for not following an obscure visa-rule, I doubt you'd be justifying it so happily.

Indeed, I've loved Australia, Asia and Europe, but I'll never set foot in US, despite multiple business conferences which happen nowhere else. I picture the agent asking: "So, you're not using your real name on Facebook. Would you agree that your are impersonating your identity against a US company?"

I think the point is they were treated horribly. They made a mistake, but it was a clerical error. Seriously in NZ you could shoot someone in the face at the airport and not get treated like that. It's a very different way of life here.

They knew they weren't tourists. They applied for a tourist visa in lieu of the proper visa. They may not have been aware of the consequences but they were aware that their actions didn't represent their actual intent. If I visit Canada and steal socks from a department store, I might not be aware of the penalty, but I am aware of the crime.

Actually, they never said it's "in lieu of proper visa". It may be, but that's not what they wrote.

The only indication about any work may be the "colleagues-not-to-be", but that may well be just a description related for the J-1 process, not their later situation. If they already had friends in the US, what's wrong with deciding to just visit them anyway on the visa waiver? (and not going to work)

If I cross into gang territory I might get shot. It's their turf and perhaps I should research the area to stay safe. That is my personal responsibility to stay safe. But that in no way would take any blame away from the gang members shooting me. In the same way these tourists are at fault, but perhaps there are lessons for US border security too? I'm sure tourist dollars are worth something to the US economy. It might be worth nurturing the tourist experience, to coax more people into the US.

ESTA is not a tourist visa. It's is a visa waiver program with somewhat limited business related entitlements.

They didn't apply for a tourist visa. I repeat, they didn't apply for a tourist visa.

I might not have read it correctly, but I didn't spot the point where they said their J-1 was not approved - just that it was in progress (and from what I hear, months-long approval processes seem pretty common in the States).

The two countries whose visa process I'm most familiar with in this situation are Singapore and Australia. I've hired many foreigners into Singapore on Employment Passes (the H1-B equivalent) and in some cases, they came in on a tourist visa whilst their EP was in progress (testimony of our hiring speed rather than the Singaporean administration, which delivers the thing in 7 working days).

Similarly, when I applied for Australian PR, which takes quite a bit longer than Singapore, the embassy specifically told me it was fine to travel in and out of the country during the application, and I did so on the usual visa waiver whatever it is called.

I once was cornered - in a polite and friendly manner - by an Australian immigration agent in Singapore on my way to Perth, who for all intents and purposes looked like a perfectly normal, unarmed civil servant in a suit, and who was wondering why I kept popping in and out of his country. Satisfied with the explanation he let me continue after 2 minutes. And if you think immigration is a hot topic in the US, you should see Australian news at the moment...

I've also held two work visas in Switzerland despite owning an "inferior, work-stealing frontalier" (not my words, those of the more right wing protectionists) French passport and I regularly fly in and out of the country without any issues.

Therefore, this story strikes me as an illustration of how bad the backend/IT/processes for immigration are in the US. The main failure point was a lack of communication, with the airline as well as with the travelers. All airlines flying to Singapore and Australia check your visa situation (as in, ask to see the visa and scan it) before you check in precisely to avoid these problems. One also has to wonder the wisdom of not allowing visa types to overlap conditionally, since other countries seem more than able to cope; and whether failing to obtain a work visa really ought to be grounds for exclusion from tourism travel.

> All airlines flying to Singapore and Australia check your visa situation (as in, ask to see the visa and scan it) before you check in precisely to avoid these problems

And I got burned by this. Wasn't aware that you need this waiver/visa thing. Got to the check-in gate about 30 minutes before they close and got rejected. Called friend in Sydney to quickly apply online. Got confirmation of application from where it normally takes about 20 minutes to get visa. Showed it to airline lady, so she called Australian border/customs where she was informed that process might take up to 9 days. Hence I wasn't allowed to even check in. I begged to do something and they just blabbered about systems not allowing them to do it. 8 minutes after registration closed I got my visa and obviously wasn't allowed to fly that day. This was Emirates airlines by the way.

When I got to Sydney next day I was questioned by a smug fatlus about what I am doing here. I could see satisfaction in her face when she asked me how I am flying back. She though 'now I got him'. Turns out I had tickets booked with different airline via different city. Asked to scan my phone for CP and drugs. Asked my friend contact details and if I can prove I am currently employed.

Entry to NZ was ok, but you could see people are intimidating. To be honest all borders I ever seen look intimidating. UK now has these spinning lights on top of their cameras that create this feeling of being surveyed. My home country agents were also incompetent not being tell the difference between my GFs passport (Taiwan republic of China). She also got bad treatment on UK border. My treatment upon entering US was intimidating as well, but fortunately short.

I also witnessed bias to uniform. Pilot found someones phone just before agents desk. Agent said in this ridiculous blockubster-marine-like voice "Sir, I will have to ask you turn off the phone". He managed get it thru to the guy in front, but you can bet your balls he would be pushed to the ground if he wasn't wearing his uniform.

> I might not have read it correctly, but I didn't spot the point where they said their J-1 was not approved - just that it was in progress (and from what I hear, months-long approval processes seem pretty common in the States).

A J-1 is initiated from a host institution, similar to how a company needs to file a Labour Condition Application (LCA) before they can hire a H1B/E3 etc.

That provides you with the invitation, and you take that and all supporting evidence to a US embassy in your country of citizenship and they assess on the spot whether to approve or deny the visa.

They either couldn't get sponsorship from a host institution, or the consulate officer rejected the application because of some other criteria.

There's not really a "months-long" approval process.

Fair. I'm not familiar with US immigration beyond anecdotes from my network.

From first contact to goes-through-the-door-of-your-office, how long would you say it would typically take to hire a Vietnamese or Chinese citizen into your SF company? Singapore's figure is 7 working days and I've done it in 36 hours.

Also, judging by the words "colleagues-to-be" they intended to work on their visa waver. This is illegal as well so even if they've got in they could have been deported later and banned from the US. The whole write up can be summed as "What do you mean 'Ignorantia juris non excusat'?!"

Not allowing entry isn't an unreasonable thing to do. It's a failure of procedure that these things are able to happen so easily. If your systems and laws make it easy to unintentionally break the law you should fix that.

The problem is also the way the US does these things. The amount of hostility and the way they treat people.

Can you give an example of a country where the laws are hard to break unintentionally or otherwise? I know only one, Somalia, because there are no laws. So I don't think I'd like you "fixing" this.

As for this case I am pretty sure their intent was to break the law, they just did not expect the consequences. They did try to get J-1 so they knew they need a visa for their visit and a waiver is not enough. They went without a visa anyways, probably hoping to talk their way through the immigration, feigning ignorance.

>Can you give an example of a country where the laws are hard to break unintentionally or otherwise?

Any country without a jumbled mess of a legal system?

www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704471504574438900830760842

Australia: laws are hard to break because their IT is efficient. And they're awesome characters.

I reckon you have a point: So many people come to US with the intent of lying to the border agent, getting a tourist visa and working. Border law isn't shoplifting or traffic law.

So, if, for example, I drive drunk in Australia (easy to do) I am not breaking any laws? Or don't pay taxes? I find this hard to believe. No matter how efficient the IT some laws are easy to break. You probably meant just the immigration laws, which was not what I asked.

>The whole write up can be summed as "What do you mean 'Ignorantia juris non excusat'?!"

Well, ignorantia SHOULD be "excusat" in some cases.

That idea of "Ignorantia juris non excusat" ("you're not excused for not knowing the law") is one of the worst and most undefensable aspects of the legal system, especially since modern law has become so vague and all-catching.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014240527487044715045744389...

It should be checked on a case by case basis, and actual ignorantia should be taken into account and count as a reason for a lesser penalty.

So? If I apply for a work visa and get denied, am I forbidden to spend some holidays in the US as well? If that's the case, the application form for the ETSA should include a question "have you recently applied for a work permit before this application?" and if the answer is yes, reject it, saving hassle for everybody involved.

It does essentially have that question.

My anonymous friend always goes to USA on the ETSA, puts business as the reason for travel, and works there (not a new job though, just the same job they already do from overseas). Although he too has been detained for random stupid reasons, never for more than 6 hours, and of course has had his luggage gone through 2-3 times each trip.

I understand your point but it's worse than guilty until proven innocent then, you are guilty whatever happen.

The ETSA shouldn't be any less valid just because you applied for a visa (denied or not) first. As far as I understand the visa was still being processed too.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com