French scientist denied entry into the U.S., French government says
reuters.com
reuters.com
Update: typos
No in that it is much less safe to visit today then it was a year ago, and authorities will specifically be targeting people who look South American.
If you closely follow the rules of the visa you're using and you don't do anything to stand out, as in you just have a normal-looking tourist itinerary, then you'll probably be fine. If it's just a vacation I would probably pick somewhere else this year though.
"none of those who enter the Cecot ever leave on foot"
Source: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/man-deported-el-salvador-ali...
This French guy flew in and was turned around. Unpleasant but much less unpleasant than the Canadian woman who crossed the land border from Mexico and was imprisoned in a for-profit prison for weeks while begging repeatedly to pay for a flight back to Canada (then after she was released, ICE claimed she would have been released earlier if they'd known she'd pay for her flight...)
But as long as its not happening to them or their closest ones US folks generally don't seem to care (enough). I don't think EU has it any better just to be clear, we humans seem to be generally deeply flawed creatures.
In fact, if it was actually what they thought they would allow entry to them for exploitation, because a subhuman cannot reason or compete properly right?
It's funny that the real bigots are realizing that plenty of people have had enough of the racist moralist and that they would rather had tightly controlled entry to their country.
In the case of the article, it's quite funny, because the guy was apparently a political dissident, one that does not even live in the country (so what he has to say is not only irrelevant but also dangerous because he won't have to bear the weight of his choices/propaganda).
Of course, this nonsense come from people complaining about Musk meddling in German politics. Before you can complain about others behavior, you need to fix yours so that it at least matches your stated ideal.
As someone not familiar with the case, I personally did find it pertinent information.
>He asked why I had gone to the San Diego border the second time to apply. I explained that that was where my lawyer’s offices were, and that he had wanted to accompany me to ensure there were no issues.
The problem is not that they have unreasonable rules, but that the implementation is very erratic/volatile/arbitrary right now. Trump orders + a layer of a mix of both Trump fanboys and Trump haters makes it hit or miss whether or not you will have problems or not.
You should comply with all entry, visa and other conditions of entry. The authorities in the US set and enforce entry rules strictly. You may be liable to arrest or detention if you break the rules. If you’re not sure how these requirements apply to you, contact the US Embassy or a consulate in the UK. [1]
[1] https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/usa/entry-requirementsCalling this a "warning" is stupid.
Or just be turned around?
You do at least get your own cell in the UK.
The UK situation you describe has clear reasoning. The US system just seems to be throwing people into a black hole without rules.
Furthermore, I've had friends who entered the UK on the wrong visa for a degree be shoved into a holding cell then deported. Fortunately they were granted the right one later, but it's standard procedure to enforce your laws.
What about the US makes Europeans and other foreigners think they have a unique right to enter? That's a privilege for US citizens only.
> they haven't existed federally since 2022
I think you are misinformed:
> In 2025, CoreCivic announced it would reopen South Texas Family Residential Center, under ICE contract, with capacity to detain up to 2,400 people
Wait, what?
For one thing, there are treaties that guarantee that. Of course, the current administration has already broken quite a few treaties in the first 100 days, so what's one more?
For another thing, that's how science, industry and business work. I've been invited dozens of times to the US either to work with/for a university, to present results at conferences, to work with US companies. Cutting that seems a certain way to ensure the decline of US industry, business and science, and encourage all of this to happen elsewhere, whether it's Europe, China, India, Japan... Of course, that seems to be a common trend with the decisions of said administration, so... maybe that's the goal?
The increased frequency of this is what seems to be new.
Of course a country isn't obliged to let you in. But throwing you into a for-profit prison is much worse than just refusing entry and turning you around.
Why are more people being imprisoned? Is this to meet a quota, to pump up statistics, to impress Trump's base?
Anecdotal evidence is my last trip to go snowboarding in Banff in Alberta Canada. My parents came along because they'd never been to Banff and were excited about seeing the Canadian Rockies. In any case, we land in Alberta and are going through customs. Scary looking dude looks at our passports and asks what we're there for. I say, "snowboarding" my mom says, "site seeing" we immediately shoot each other a look like, "Oh shit, that wasn't good.". Without a blink, border guy told us to move on and keep the line moving.
We both spoke about it and agreed that whatever they were looking for, we clearly did not fit the profile they were screening for.
If someone wanted to make a statement or make a point about the free U.S., one wonders what creative things one could assign as their phone wallpaper before going through customs.
I'm still in 4 figure debt from the last made up reason a CBPO used to fuck with me.
in the past having a contrarian opinion would get you ostracised or fired maybe. but restricting access post grant is a new trend in the wrong direction.
[1] https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/03/14/video-columbia-universit...
This is very scary. I’m an American community college instructor in Silicon Valley who does research with domestic and international colleagues; in fact, I will be in Japan this summer as a visiting researcher. If people could be denied entry to the United States over harmless political opinions shared electronically, then this hurts our ability to collaborate in-person with foreign researchers in the United States, and this also hurts our ability to hold academic conferences here.
It’s one thing if the scientist made threats or advocated overthrow; that is not protected free speech. But if it’s just an opinion or even name-calling, then this denial of entry is flatly wrong and flatly un-American.
Perhaps it’s time for prominent US academic conferences with international attendees to move to Canada, France, Japan, or some other place where scientists and science in general are not under attack by their government.
If someone says "presidential democracies are historically unstable, the US would do better under a parliamentary system" is that advocating overthrow?
When Trump said "Proud Boys stand back and stand by" was he advocating overthrow?
At any rate, this is just a distraction from how the Trump administration has been seeking to consolidate executive power unconstitutionally since taking office a 2nd time.
No, there are no jobs Americans don't want to do. As you say, its a massive country with 300 million people, there's a diverse set of skills and labor pool here. They just want market-level wages to do them.
There's been migration, it's been largely controlled migration for the past 120 years, with no expectation that migrants would be subsidized and provided with shelter, cell phones, etc. or that we'd allow gangs from Venezuela to establish footholds and allow human and drug trafficking to pass through completely unchecked.
There is nothing Trump has done that any previous president hasn't already done. Presidents have a lot of power under the Constitution and even more that Congress has delegated to them over the years.
> There is nothing Trump has done that any previous president hasn't already done.
How many presidents managed to crash a booming economy in just a few months?
If you want actual data to attribute blame, see https://www.cato.org/commentary/trumps-immigration-policies-... and recall how Trump caused a bipartisan effort to actually try to fix the immigration mess to collapse.
Illegal immigration hit record levels under Biden's administration:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/southwest-land-border-enc...
and the Roosevelt hotel:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/mayor-eric-adams-says-nycs-roosev...
Unsustainable and terrible waste of money. There are millions of people that would pay money out of their own pockets to come to the U.S., educated people who are self-sufficient and we wasted money on making a bad problem worse.
So, the data that is presented and documented is irrelevant and dismissible?
> Illegal immigration hit record levels under Biden's administration
As did deportations (e.g., https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c36e41dx425o)
> https://www.foxnews.com/us/mayor-eric-adams-says-nycs-roosev...
Yes, the Roosevelt Hotel was used for housing for asylum seekers. US immigration law allows for asylum seekers. Those asylum seekers must be housed somewhere. Certain states (e.g., Texas) transferred asylum seekers to New York City for a (arguably justified) political stunt. New York City used the Roosevelt Hotel.
> Unsustainable and terrible waste of money. There are millions of people that would pay money out of their own pockets to come to the U.S., educated people who are self-sufficient and we wasted money on making a bad problem worse.
That isn't how US immigration law works. Everyone agrees US Immigration law is a disaster. As I mentioned, there was a bipartisan agreement to help fix it. Trump derailed that effort.
The FBI defines terrorism as: "Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature."
Clearly, criminal trespass on someone's Tesla to discourage Elon Musk from taking actions against your ideological goals falls within that category.
This is known as the "Shirley Exception", https://vocal.media/theSwamp/the-shirley-exception
The reality is that people are being arrested and deported with no evidence of advocating violence. Here are some examples. https://www.axios.com/newsletters/axios-denver-8d5a7cc0-04fd...
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/se...
To wit:
committing a crime, including driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol
Especially when the government in question advertises itself as being a beacon of free speech and all the rest of it. So at least it's hypocritical. And again, this is whataboutism. Just because Canada does something like this doesn't mean that Canada's pants have to also do it.
The fact that the FBI was also called in tells me that there is a lot more to this story than what Reuters is reporting.