I think the title is deficient and should be based on this higher-weighted fact, over the weaker phrasing "refused entry".
"Tourist jailed without trial for possessing political cartoon"
I think the title is deficient and should be based on this higher-weighted fact, over the weaker phrasing "refused entry".
"Tourist jailed without trial for possessing political cartoon"
I don’t doubt that it’s possible he was denied because of the Vance image and that in itself says something terrible about the current state of affairs.
But I think it’s more likely that he was stopped based on some other red flag like not having a return ticket and denied because of that.
He does say he was detained PRIOR to the picture being found. Being detained if far more relevant than being asked about a photo.
It's also important to note that Border Control will not tell you WHY you're being denied entry, so the person ascribing it to the meme is speculating based on being asked about it.
That he was refused entry because of the picture is his speculation and likely not the full truth because they only found the picture after already pulling him aside.
There is certainly questionable behavior by the CPB here if the description is correct but lets not make conclusions that aren't backed by facts.
Edit: CPB refutes that he was denied entry because of the meme: https://x.com/CBP/status/1937651325354795444
The context: He smoked weed in California, where it's legal, years ago.
This guy isn't a drug trafficker. He's not doing meth or heroin, never did. He smoked weed, in a legal state (as millions of Americans do on a daily basis).
Then he made the critical mistake of handing over his phone to be searched, rather than flying home (!), upon which advanced creepy software (probably developed and funded by some of this very crowd) flagged this 'federal crime' of smoking weed while in Cali.
So yes, the meme is a red herring, but it's distracting from a thing that's still incredibly fucked up.
It's still a demented justification to turn someone away from the country. "You can come here, buy weed in a majority of states, and face no fear of repercussions... Until you try and come back in". That's nutty. It's batshit.
And, the real reason he was brought in - as brought up by the Immi officers - was that he was doing journalism at one of the anti-genocide protests.
Keep in mind I'm very much not pro Isreal, but it's not practical or moral to have foreign partisans participating in our politics that way.
That would be called 'freedom of assembly', which is a universal human right (see Article 20 of the UNDHR). Highly moral, most practical, and widely recognized as such.
A state (not federal) senator and his wife were attempted murdered, but both survived and are expected to recover.
Your comment frames it as if 2 members of federal congress were assassinated which would have been a much bigger deal. State politicians being killed is still shocking and tragic, but try to be precise in your language as to not mislead.
This is not a good sign for democracy in the US. I think a healthy response would be protests, investigations, state and federal "comissions" looking into domestic political terrorism, etc. A whole lot of consequences. Instead there is nothing.
In contrast, in Brazil (not even a best example of a healthiest democracy) the assassination of a city councilwoman (city! not even state!) has been a dominant story in politics for many years and has never completely fallen out of public attention. It's been close to a decade!
I'm not one to quickly say "fascism" or to spell out doom but even to me this is a crystal clear sign of a system starting to fail...
Jail almost by definition means pretrial detention, so "jailed without trial" is a tautology.
> A jail holds people for shorter periods of time (for example, less than a year) or for pre-trial detention and is usually operated by a local government, typically the county sheriff.
> A prison or penitentiary holds people for longer periods of time, such as many years, and is operated by a state or federal government. After a conviction, a sentenced person is sent to prison.
Here's an example of it used that way in Virginia's laws, at https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title18.2/chapter1/secti...
> The authorized punishments for conviction of a misdemeanor are:
> (a) For Class 1 misdemeanors, confinement in jail for not more than twelve months and a fine of not more than $2,500, either or both.
Nitpicking about the precise legal terminology is a bit pointless in this context.
If some protester got arrested for protesting, the reasonable thing to do is to call it just that, not "protester jailed without trial for protesting".