What a completely arrogant, inaccurate comment. What does having exit controls for international flights have to do with "permission" being required for US citizens? That's right, absolutely nothing. Have you ever been to an airport in most other countries outside the other US, whose citizens also don't need "permission" to leave their country? Guess what - many of them have exit controls.

In the US the issue is a logistical one, not a constitutional one. But it is not inconceivable that outbound international flights could be moved to a specific area, or set of areas within an airport, just as inbound ones are today. The simplest way of achieving this would be to nominate a set of gates at the end of a concourse as outbound international gates and put a series of CBP desks there. It could even be a temporary setup that was only activated for a number of hours each day.

It really is only a matter of time before a system like this is put in place.

I do the same about going through security. I use my passport to get my boarding pass, then put it away and use my domestic ID to get through security. TSA never bats an eye, even when I'm clearing security at the station from which my international flight departs (no connection).

But, the gate is another matter. I've flown AA to Europe out of DFW a half dozen times this year, and every single time, the gate agent began boarding with the announcement "please have your passport in hand as well as your boarding pass!"

The agents didn't actually open the passports or look at the ID pages. Instead, they just wanted to see that each passenger HAD a passport, so that nobody would arrive in Europe without one.

OLCI complicates things a bit, because theoretically a passenger could enter the details online, and then get all the way to the gate without ever showing an airline or government employee in person that he/she has a valid passport in his/her possession. This probably makes the airlines a bit nervous, because a lot of revenue is at stake.

So, I believe that AA is checking for a passport in hand at international departure gates because if a passenger arrives overseas without his/her passport (left it in the bathroom, lost it somewhere, forgot it at home, etc), then the person cannot be admitted and the AIRLINE has to transport the person back to the origin country at the AIRLINE'S expense, because it was the AIRLINE'S fault for allowing the passenger to board without proper international documentation.

The interesting thing is, DFW is the only station where the agents have consistently checked for passports at the boarding gate for international flights. Never happened at JFK, and happened maybe 50% of the time at MIA.


Um...that's incorrect. Of course US Citizens have to get government permission to leave the country. In fact, it's a two-step process:

1) Applying for a passport means applying for permission to leave the country. The State Dept can approve or deny these applications. If you get into legal trouble, one of the easiest things they can do is confiscate your passport (which remains US Govt property at all times).

2) Obtaining a boarding pass for an international flight. Before the airlines are permitted to issue you a boarding pass, your passport data are entered and your record must be checked against multiple government databases to be sure you aren't fleeing US jurisdiction with an active arrest warrant, outstanding child support, custody issues, tax problems, etc. If the US Govt doesn't want you leaving the country, agencies can red-flag you, and the airlines will deny you boarding.



So....yes, US Citizens do need government permission to leave the country, for each and every instance of international travel. Now, it usually doesn't involve an investigation/interrogation of the type that citizens of some other countries get from officials as they try to leave, but rest assured, an investigation is happening in the background every time the airline agent swipes your passport in the computer to request permission to generate an international boarding pass for you.

Absolutely true, and not just commercially. Private flights must now wait until CBP grants them permission to depart to "insure the passengers are not on the 'no fly' list." FB has specifically stated it is coming to land crossing in private vehicles too. When will we be erecting statues of Stalin and Lenin? Electronic or paper, seen or unseen, exit permissions are exit visas by any other name. I am not wondering if? anymore, I am wondering when and how?

So, when I walk across the US/Mexico border, I somehow received clearance from the US government to do so? If I drive or take a bus across the Canadian border? If I take a speedboat or sailboat or cabin cruiser from Ft. Lauderdale to the Bahamas, I somehow received clearance as well? You guys are assume that air travel is the only way to leave the US. That is not true and is in fact a very small percentage of crossings per day. So, don't confuse regulations for international air travel out of the US with leaving the US in general.

Back to the OP's point, again, if you want to reconfigure every US airport that has a departing international flight, think about those costs for every airport. As someone who travels internationally at least once a month - for close to 15 years now - and have flown, driven, walked, bussed and gone by boat and ferry as well, there are a lot of ways to leave the US that don't involve buying a plane ticket or applying for a passport for each and every instance of international travel.

You obviously missed Firebug's post about the land border checkpoints being modified to support OUTBOUND checks of all parties and the other reference posts to the DHS desire to require an eAPIS-like program for boaters.

What land border checkpoints for outbound? Are they going to double the staff for CBP, which is what all of this requires. Are they going to build a new facility at every land crossing, since there's nothing on the outbound side now in most cases? What about car lanes, are they going to build outbound checkpoints for each lane on each road?

For boats, are they somehow going to put a CBP station at every small inlet along the who-knows-how-many thousands of miles of coastline? How would they enforce that?

Someone in Congress may be screaming about "outbound immigration" but from a practical perspective, it's not remotely doable without spending hundreds of billions of dollars. SusanYRV had it right with her satire, that's what you would have. And it would still be unenforceable. Look at the current land border crossings where, theoretically, you now need a passport or equivalent to return without a secondary. Thousands are still crossing every day on a drivers license with no ill effects. DHS can scream all it wants about what it feels are requirements but in the end, they can't stop people from leaving and they certainly can't prevent a citizen from re-entering even if they have no ID of any sort. You may hit a secondary for a short while as they confirm your citizenship but in the end, you'll have no real problems coming and going.

The UK does not do outbound passport control - it's "subcontracted" to the airline in that if they have to repatriate you because you are refused entry it is at their cost. Thus, airlines do check.

I've never had any sort of Government official check my passport on the way out of the UK to anywhere by air. It's always the gate agent.

Neil

Not that huge. The UK does it in a few places by taking your photograph at check-in (or before security if you check-in online I think) if you are travelling on a domestic flight. This is then displayed to the gate agent who can verify that you haven't swapped boarding passes.

That said, most smaller UK airports segregate arrivals and departures, and you have to enter the UK and pass through security again to transit unless you enter on a domestic flight, in which case some airports let you into the departure lounge straight away.

Neil

I departed LHR on 11/30/09, right after the security check, there was an "official" looking agent (she wore a blazer) inspecting passports, she made a point of looking for my entry stamp. When I got to my departure gate AA agents (as usual) looked at my pp. [There are podiums set up--so I guess every now and then they use them.:)]

LHR indeed does sometimes have something approaching what appears to be exit passport control checks. It's not common and it's not a daily procedure like in the US or say the EU Schengen countries, but such checking of passports of persons departing the UK from LHR indeed does sometimes exist where you noted above.

I can't find anything concrete in this regard but IIRC it was a pledge of both parties in the UK coalition government to re-introduce exit checks (in spite of the fact that it was the last Conservative administration that did away with them!).

Confirm that on a recent flight out of STN there were UKBA staff checking documents (not everyone's though) just before the exit from the security zone.

Apparently, the answer to your questions concerning land borders is "yes." Canadian Arrested at Border. This Canadian was in his car, leaving the US at the Port Huron - Sarnia crossing (Bluewater Bridge) when his car was stopped by CBP agents for an exit inspection. He was uncooperative with what most of us would likewise be outraged at.

For boats, it is required if you touch foreign soil coming back. link. Nappy has stated in public speeches it will be required for outbound pleasure and private non-commercial fishermen as well.

As for enforcing it, they will likely do what they do for aircraft. Force you to sail to an authorized dock/port of entry. Certain airports are designated as international ports of entry where you must fly to to clear customs, or certain docks, if you're a seaplane. There are other airports where, if given prior permission you will be met by customs at a designated time called landing rights airports. For boats they already have international ports of entry where you will be met by customs.

It is already the case for aircraft, and you MUST use the internet. Even in places where it doesn't exist. Like remote northern Ontario lakes where seaplanes land and take off. My camp is one of these and there is no road, no electricity, no telephone and certainly no internet. Just a lake to land on and a dock, if you have a seaplane. I haven't used it since this latest round of CBP started and it is for sale.

Just how long do you think they'll wait before they spring it on cars in a more widespread manner than the scattered reports we're starting to hear now?

As for doubling the KBP staff, well there're a lot of unemployed voters out there who could use a job. Would you like a job citizen?

And as far as stopping someone from leaving, they can and did. At gunpoint. link here.. And CBP apparently claimed it was justified. "She said the Long Beach action was justified, even though the search turned up nothing illegal. "While the involvement of more than one law enforcement agency and the heightened alert of the situation were slightly unusual, it is within (CBP's) authority to inspect inbound and outbound travelers, vehicles, planes, cargo, etc.," she told AVweb. She also said that only the Long Beach police officers assisting the operation actually drew weapons and CBP agents kept theirs holstered, something Perry vehemently disputes. "Every one of them had their weapons out," Perry said.

Perry also said that while most of those who surrounded his airplane carried pistols, he saw at least one assault rifle carried by a CBP agent. Ivahnenko said the CBP agents involved are not equipped with assault rifles and the tactical team that does carry them was not in Long Beach that day. Perry adamantly disagrees with Ivahnenko regarding the presence of assault rifles. While Ivahnenko maintains CBP agents did not draw weapons, she said it was their idea that the Long Beach police officers have their guns out...."

It seems that you have never encountered outbound immigration control at the land crossings. They do exist. They are temporary now, and there are no dedicated facilities to perform them, but they are very real. CBP just stops all outbound cars (whether US citizens or not) and checks their immigration documents. I saw them redirecting several outbound cars for secondary inspection. So, your "there will never be exit controls on US citizens" is non-sense because the exit control already exists.

schengen member state border guards are not allowed to ask such questions to schengen member states citizens.

al

Why?

Who cares if a citizen leaves? I have always thought that the ONLY reason that the airline checks your PP is so they can be reasonably sure you will be admitted at your destination. Otherwise if you get sent back, the AIRLINE has to take you - and they don't want that. Other than this I am not sure why the govt cares if you go.

s

Two answers:

1. Follow the money - this is how contracting companies get rich off of tax dollars
2. Control over yet another aspect of peoples lives

The citizen might be a wanted criminal on the run.

Really? Can you refer me to the law / regulations / procedures for this?

Freedom of Movement is a fundamental tenet of the European Union and one of the Four Freedoms.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Fr...opean_Union%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union

More specifically, see the Schengen Borders Code:

http://europa.eu/legislation_summari.../l14514_en.htm

In particular:

So basically - as I understand if you are an EU citizen, have a valid document that belongs to you and the officer is satisfied of this - that's it!
As a British Citizen I have never been asked a single question entering or exiting the UK or any EU/Schengen country.

All true, but that does not mean that an immigration officer would not be allowed to ask a question to verify that the traveller is the real holder of the passport. I know, for instance, that Dutch police is assisting Spanish immigration at the port of Algeciras in Southern Spain to verify the citizenship of returning Dutch nationals of Moroccan background.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot are you smoking?

ORD would be particularly painful to reconfigure - everyone would either have to exit security and take the people-mover to T5 for international connections (which would probably then be massively over capacity in terms of # of gates and need to expand somehow), or the alternate would need to be that some portion of the B concourse in T1 (probably the high # side) would need to be converted to international departures for *A members (UA, CO, AC), and one of the smaller T3 concourses (G or L) would need to be done for the other international flights that currently depart from T2/T3. Both would require interior/exterior changes to accommodate 747/767/777 operations in gates that don't have enough space outside for the plane, or inside for the passengers.

Either option would probably cost hundreds of millions to implement.

politicians and government bureacrats will have little trouble getting this done
in order to improve national security and create new jobs(thousands of new
constructions jobs, as well as new CBP officers)

"What are the border checks on EU nationals travelling?
EU citizens are allowed to enter the territory of EU Member States on presentation of a valid passport or ID card unless they represent a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat to public policy or public security. Internal border checks, both on EU citizens and on third-country nationals, are abolished between the countries implementing the Schengen acquis. “Internal borders” means land borders between the Member States, airports for flights between the Schengen States and seaports for regular ferry services between the Schengen States.

However, everyone, including EC citizens, may still be subject to certain checks when crossing borders between Member States as the Schengen provisions allow the possibility to reintroduce border checks temporarily at internal borders, should this be necessary on grounds of public order or national security. In any case, as a matter of principle, EU citizens should be asked no questions about the purpose of their journey, means of subsistence, etc. Most land terminals, airports and seaports have special reserved channels for EU citizens and members of their family. The Schengen provisions do not affect Member States’ right to require travellers to hold, carry and produce permits and travel documents, nor to exercise police powers throughout their territory."

http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/faq...etravel_en.htm

room for interpretation i admit, but the rule is strongly biased towards not asking. (someone posted an official link on ft a while ago that specifically said not allowed if i remember well. cannot find it right now though.) there is probably an implicit distinction between a routine check, 99.9% of the cases, no questions to be asked, and a special check, where you are really becoming part of a police/customs investigation, where different rules will apply, ie specific suspicion must be articulated etc. this is very different from an american border check where everyone, even citizens, is suspicious a priori and can and will be questioned.

al

I had my first encounter with customs in AMS last month.

I go to Europe every July to umpire a baseball tournament. That means I'm carrying 2 50-pound large bags along with a briefcase. As I'm walking out of AMS, a customs agent walked up to me and asked me about my bags. I simply said, "I'm going to umpire baseball -- clothes in one bag, gear in the other," and he said "have a nice stay."

First time I've ever had anyone say anything to me in the last 6 years.