There have always been nasty, bitter clerks and ticket agents. All 9/11 did was empower them.

Mike

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/usc...0aRCRD&CH=8cfr

I'm reproducing a couple of things for your benefit

INA: ACT 235 - INSPECTION BY IMMIGRATION OFFICERS; EXPEDITED REMOVAL OF INADMISSIBLE ARRIVING ALIENS; REFERRAL FOR HEARING

Section 2A - In general.-Subject to subparagraphs (B) and (C), in the case of an alien who is an applicant for admission, if the examining immigration officer determines that an alien seeking admission is not clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to be admitted, the alien shall be detained for a proceeding under section 240.

You can go through all of the text in the relevant CFRs but essentially all valid visa holders are entitled to due process and a hearing before an immigration judge. Non visa holders are not (expect for those claiming asylum) and that would include people traveling under VWP. In fact again there is a section on this and it does say the officers decision is final in the case of VWP - again this was something I had mentioned in my previous post.

Hmm. I really really hope you don't have anything to do with practicing law.

The State Department however says:
A visa is issued by a U.S. Embassy or Consulate. A visa entitles the holder to travel to the United States and apply for admission; it does not guarantee entry. An immigration inspector at the port of entry determines the visa holder's eligibility for admission into the United States.


That must be because they are referring to the following:

INA: ACT 235 - INSPECTION BY IMMIGRATION OFFICERS
(1) Inspection of aliens arriving in the United States and certain other aliens who have not been admitted or paroled.-
(A) Screening.-
i) In general.-If an immigration officer determines that an alien (other than an alien described in subparagraph (F)) who is arriving in the United States or is described in clause (iii) is inadmissible under section 212(a)(6)(C) or 212(a)(7) , the officer shall order the alien removed from the United States without further hearing or review unless the alien indicates either an intention to apply for asylum under section 208 or a fear of persecution.


You referenced the section 2, regarding "Other aliens" and not section 1.

That may be the case, but the US constitution has certain protections that cannot be overridden by Congress. If someone claims that they were denied entry due to race, religion, etc., while someone else of their nationality was admitted, they can sue the government for violation of the equal protection clause. They could also claim violation of due process if they weren't given a hearing of some sort.

I don't think anyone has ever made such a claim, but it could happen if someone had enough time and money and a good US-based lawyer. I wouldn't discount the possibility just because Congress said the decision is final.

So how do the inadmissible clauses in the above apply to someone with a valid visa and travel documents?

It's always the woman agents. Always.

Why does this happen exactly? Do US nationals have their fingerprints stored on the biometric chip of their passports?

The fact that this happens to ethnic minority citizens (I'm guessing the Muslim/Arab/Asian looking ones) shows how hideously uncomfortable the US is with diversity.

Has anyone had any success in bringing in the interview to a close by pointing out the rudeness, saying you feel threatened, and asking for a supervisor?

Actually, there is a good reason to fingerprint non-citizens: Espionage.

When presented with a US passport they can check to see that the photo on file matches the person and that the passport is valid. It would be pretty hard to slip in on a forged/tampered US passport.

They can't make such checks on foreign passports. Fingerprints won't catch forged foreign passports *THE FIRST TIME* but it means that once a spy has come into the country once they can never come in under another identity.

I've never heard a convincing reason for the fingerprinting of non-citizens upon entry to a country. Having read this post hasn't changed that in the slightest.

DHS's fingerprint process doesn't necessarily catch people using forged foreign passports repeatedly to enter the US.

Much the same goes for DHS's fingerprint process and use of fraudulent passports or fraudulently used "legitimate" passports.

DHS's fingerprint matching is also otherwise something that can be made to fail, no less so when having the backing of resources of some of the states -- so-called "friendly" or otherwise -- that engage in espionage against the US.

This is not necessarily true. I have a friend who is English (white) and he had a rude officer entering the US one time while living and working here on an H1-B visa. On that occasion it should be pointed out that the CBP officer was black.

I myself (non-white person) have traveled to the US under the following category over the years - Visa Wavier Program, Visa holder (H1-B), Green Card holder and now US citizen. I have posted in other threads about this but the one occasion I got a lot of questions was while as a US citizen. I don't ever recall rude behavior or any issues travelling in and out of the country.

I'm sure you'd be successful in bringing that interview to a close. There'd probably be a follow-up.

Yes but I was referring to US nationals?

I would agree in that I've heard a number of stories from friends about rude / hostile treatment when entering Canada. Other than Canada, I've also heard complaints about the US and the UK.

I have, however, never been treated anything other than nicely by an immigration official anywhere, including Canada and the US. I'm sure there are bad apples - there are everywhere - but I've never encountered them. I wouldn't judge the entire country based on them - I think both Canada and the US are beautiful countries and wholly worthy of visiting.