So as currently interpreted there was no violation in this case, correct? The United States has laws that controls entry and immigration. This person stayed beyond her visa period and was in violation. Removal is often the result of overstaying a visa which is what seems to be the case here. If a person wishes to immigrate to the United States then follow the law. Otherwise get what is rightfully coming.

Sorry, but you seem to miss the point entirely. What makes this "case" important is not the fact that the woman was deported, but that there appears to be a violation of both the 4th and 5th Amendments by ICE. In America, no one has to prove to a LEO in a random stop that they haven't committed a crime.

Do you know of any legal action being taken against CBP in this case?

Not having been there I don't know what conversation might have taken place and assuming that Federal LEO's violated this woman's rights without evidence seems a bit much.

Boggie, a massive point that you seem to be missing is that they stopped a busload of people, not just one person. They violated everyone's rights on that bus, just to nab one person who overstayed her visa.

I doubt if too many people who have commented on this thread ride Greyhound, but if they started doing this on domestic airline flights or Amtrak or any public transit system in any city, then we are getting very close to a "paper's please" form of government.

And if getting off the plane on a flight between say ORD and FLL was delayed by CBP for the 90 minutes or more it would take to check a plane full of passengers who weren't expecting or prepared for a document check, we'd be hearing plenty of squealing right here.

No. And it doesn't matter. My professional opinion is that what happened was a violation of this person's 4th and 5th Amendment rights. You don't have to believe me, but I'm also not alone in thinking this.

All the "evidence" is right there. When someone is on a bus and can't readily get off because ICE is blocking the way, that is detainment and also coercive. Interrogation while detained in a coercive context is a violation of 4th and 5th Amendment rights -- what counts is the person's perception. And, again, the idea that someone must prove to LEOs that they haven't done something wrong when there was no reason for the LEOs to be there in the first place is completely offensive to the fundamental principles of American justice (and the Constitution).

If you don't believe me, ask the ACLU. <deleted>.

<deleted>. As far as I know no one here has any first hand evidence of exactly what occurred on that bus. What words were spoken, what physical actions were taken. I know I don't, do you? I have no problem with the ACLU but I think you have to agree they often take the side of the most liberal reading of the Constitution. I would think that if any violations were made by CBP then someone would have initiated some sort of action by now. <deleted>

Moderator's Note:
 

Please keep in mind the following FlyerTalk Rule when posting:
Future personal exchanges will be summarily deleted without further notice. Repeat offenders will be subject to discipline (FT Rule 23).

TWA884
Travel Safety/Security co-moderator

I'm not sure you're correct that the person's perception is what counts.

If the police pull me over, take my license and registration from me, and then say "we need to search your car", my perception may be that I have no choice but to say "okay". But if I do, that is clearly a consensual search.

Not necessarily. To be valid, consent to search must be voluntary. There is a long line of cases holding that coercion vitiates consent.

"Your money or your life."

Amtrak now, too:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/border...heyre-citizens

CBP is telling riders to prove they are citizens, not that they are here legally. What would happen to a LPR or tourist who was caught?

It did happen. There was squealing. ACLU sued.

https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/chec...flights-6.html

Ari, you might want to fix that useful link...

I know it's only been a few months, but how is that lawsuit proceding?

Not well; the government more or less ignored routine court scheduling and conferencing orders and then pretended it didn't. The Magistrate Judge on the case wasn't buying it:

Expect more in late March or early April.