As a US citizen, what questions is Customs permitted to ask you on arrival in the US?
Dec 30, 2007, 9:52 pm
#151
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Copenhagen
Programs: British Airways Gold (oneWorld Emerald), Starwood Preferred Guest Platinum
Posts: 1,713
It is very real
To compare present USA with Nazi Germany is crazy. Anyone who has studied Hitler's rise to power from Mein Kampf in early 1920's to WWII knows the two are not comparable. I could lecture all night but this is a travel forum, not a history forum. I would have thought a European would know more about Germany's history.
Please do not get personal.
Dec 30, 2007, 10:00 pm
#152
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Copenhagen
Programs: British Airways Gold (oneWorld Emerald), Starwood Preferred Guest Platinum
Posts: 1,713
Typical American getting offended my sound observations
It would suit you and help the regard in which strangers may hold you, if you were not to offend those making such references.I know more of German and American history than you might think. :-:
It is a fact that of all the many countries I have visited, the one that treats the people on its soil the most like Nazi Germany did, is the USA. That is not meant as an insult. Merely a fact.
Last edited by Goldlust; Jan 1, 2008 at 10:30 am Reason: Corrected "if" to "of"
Dec 30, 2007, 10:02 pm
#153
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Copenhagen
Programs: British Airways Gold (oneWorld Emerald), Starwood Preferred Guest Platinum
Posts: 1,713
I think it is not true.
Depends on what is contained in the word "trouble", I suppose.
Dec 31, 2007, 12:57 am
#154
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 545
I have probably crossed more than 500 borders including over 100 times thru US customs. I have been asked the simple questions that US Customs asks very frequently around the world. I believe counties have the right to protect their citizens and if asking a few questions helps, I hope they continue to do it. .
In the US, our own customs interrogates us, supposeldy in a search for crazy foreign "terrorists". Huh?
Boy what a welcome home. At least it gives you a quick reminder of why it wasnt so bad to leave....
Tell you what though. If I encounter this question again my response will be "The purpose of my trip is to excercise my born right to enter this country."
Last edited by osamede; Dec 31, 2007 at 1:12 am
Dec 31, 2007, 1:37 am
#156
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,939
Currently, the only requirement is that the CBP is cordial and professional. I believe the argument is that even though you land on US soil, you aren't officially in the country until cleared by the CBP. They currently are exempt from 4th amendment search and seizure. There are many good ones, but like any profession there are a few that take their job too seriously. When crossing the border, they can look at anything they want, your wallet, your laptop contents, receipts from abroad, etc. They can ask you anything they want as well, as long as they are 'professional and courteous'. They can even send you to the guy with the glove for a more thorough inspection 
. You can appeal inappropriate behavior, but it doesn't mean it will happen in a timely manner.
Can they lock you up and throw away the key? Not easily. They can however spend several hours reviewing your details and belongings. Even if they only keep you for an hour or two to inconvenience you, missing a connecting flight can create a whole mess of problems that may not be easily be recovered from.
My point is pick your battles with them carefully as they have more than enough power to ruin your day. Whether they should have this power, is an entirely different thread.
. You can appeal inappropriate behavior, but it doesn't mean it will happen in a timely manner.Can they lock you up and throw away the key? Not easily. They can however spend several hours reviewing your details and belongings. Even if they only keep you for an hour or two to inconvenience you, missing a connecting flight can create a whole mess of problems that may not be easily be recovered from.
My point is pick your battles with them carefully as they have more than enough power to ruin your day. Whether they should have this power, is an entirely different thread.
Dec 31, 2007, 7:23 am
#157
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: First Terrace of Purgatory (look it up)
Posts: 320
And as has been explained to you over and over and over again, that they ask a question does not deprive you of any liberty you think you had. You may, as others have, decline to answer. Morever, as law dawg noted, there is case law going back centuries that notes that the level of inquiry at the border can be higher than a police officer asking you questions on the street. Again, you seem to be under the impression all you have to say is "I am a citizen of the U.S." and they must then cease to ask you questions. That's not the case, never has been.
Dec 31, 2007, 7:24 am
#158
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Copenhagen
Programs: British Airways Gold (oneWorld Emerald), Starwood Preferred Guest Platinum
Posts: 1,713
[...] You can appeal inappropriate behavior, but it doesn't mean it will happen in a timely manner.
Can they lock you up and throw away the key? Not easily. They can however spend several hours reviewing your details and belongings. Even if they only keep you for an hour or two to inconvenience you, missing a connecting flight can create a whole mess of problems that may not be easily be recovered from.
My point is pick your battles with them carefully as they have more than enough power to ruin your day. Whether they should have this power, is an entirely different thread.
Can they lock you up and throw away the key? Not easily. They can however spend several hours reviewing your details and belongings. Even if they only keep you for an hour or two to inconvenience you, missing a connecting flight can create a whole mess of problems that may not be easily be recovered from.
My point is pick your battles with them carefully as they have more than enough power to ruin your day. Whether they should have this power, is an entirely different thread.
On a more practical note, I have never had any problem with US immigration or customs. In fact, customs had never asked me a single question until I entered the US in JFK earlier this month and approached a customs officer telling him that I wanted to declare some prescription medicine.
Conversation:
Officer: "How much do you have?"
Goldlust begins to open his bag ...
Officer: "Do you have a pharmacy or just for your own use?"
Goldlust: "Just for my own use."
Officer: "Fine. That is all I need to know. You give me your word that you are not selling any of it and that is fine. Do you have your customs form?"
Goldlust hands officer customs form.
That was the end of that conversation. Turned out a lot less cumbersome that I would have expected.
Dec 31, 2007, 7:28 am
#159
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: First Terrace of Purgatory (look it up)
Posts: 320
Currently, the only requirement is that the CBP is cordial and professional. I believe the argument is that even though you land on US soil, you aren't officially in the country until cleared by the CBP. They currently are exempt from 4th amendment search and seizure.
Not exactly. The 4th Amendment only prohibits "unreasonble" search and seizure.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. "
The courts have held since the 4th Amendment was ratified that it is reasonable for the U.S., through its customs and immigration powers (or both) to search a person and interrogate them as they attempt to enter regardless of their claimed citizenship.
And I would argue that a nation's customs and immigrations authorities should have the power to ensure that the person claiming to be a U.S. citizen coming into the U.S. really is and to ask such questions as are needed to ensure they really are.
Dec 31, 2007, 7:35 am
#160
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: First Terrace of Purgatory (look it up)
Posts: 320
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/c...nt04/04.html#2
It is a myth. And for good reason. Law Dawg's post gives the case law, I provided some more. And note this all pre-dates the Patriot Act and whatnot.
You are clammoring for a "lost liberty" you never had and I would argue you should not have, namely, the ability to enter a nation at will simply on your sayso that you are a U.S. citizen with no further inquiry.
''That searches made at the border, pursuant to the longstanding right of the sovereign to protect itself by stopping and examining persons and property crossing into this country, are reasonable simply by virtue of the fact that they occur at the border, should, by now, require no extended demonstration.'' United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873 (1975).
Authorized by the First Congress, (Act of July 31, 1789, ch.5, Sec. Sec. 23, Sec. 24, 1 Stat. 43. See 19 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 507, 1581, 1582) the customs search in these circumstances requires no warrant, no probable cause, not even the showing of some degree of suspicion that accompanies even investigatory stops. Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132, 154 (1925); United States v. Thirty-Seven Photographs, 402 U.S. 363, 376 (1971); Almeida- Sanchez v. United States, 413 U.S. 266, 272 (1973).
Moreover, while prolonged detention of travelers beyond the routine customs search and inspection must be justified by the Terry standard of reasonable suspicion having a particularized and objective basis, (United States v. Montoya de Hernandez, 473 U.S. 531 (1985) (approving warrantless detention incommunicado for more than 24 hours of traveler suspected of alimentary canal drug smuggling)) Terry protections as to the length and intrusiveness of the search do not apply. (Id. A traveler suspected of alimentary canal drug smuggling was strip searched, and then given a choice between an abdominal x-ray or monitored bowel movements. Because the suspect chose the latter option, the court disavowed decision as to ''what level of suspicion, if any, is required for . . . strip, body cavity, or involuntary x-ray searches.'' Id. at 541 n.4.)
Again, there seems to be some myth that simply saying "I am a U.S. citizen" must instantly be accepted and all further questions halted and that immigration or customs officials should then simply tip their hats and say "have a nice day".Authorized by the First Congress, (Act of July 31, 1789, ch.5, Sec. Sec. 23, Sec. 24, 1 Stat. 43. See 19 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 507, 1581, 1582) the customs search in these circumstances requires no warrant, no probable cause, not even the showing of some degree of suspicion that accompanies even investigatory stops. Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132, 154 (1925); United States v. Thirty-Seven Photographs, 402 U.S. 363, 376 (1971); Almeida- Sanchez v. United States, 413 U.S. 266, 272 (1973).
Moreover, while prolonged detention of travelers beyond the routine customs search and inspection must be justified by the Terry standard of reasonable suspicion having a particularized and objective basis, (United States v. Montoya de Hernandez, 473 U.S. 531 (1985) (approving warrantless detention incommunicado for more than 24 hours of traveler suspected of alimentary canal drug smuggling)) Terry protections as to the length and intrusiveness of the search do not apply. (Id. A traveler suspected of alimentary canal drug smuggling was strip searched, and then given a choice between an abdominal x-ray or monitored bowel movements. Because the suspect chose the latter option, the court disavowed decision as to ''what level of suspicion, if any, is required for . . . strip, body cavity, or involuntary x-ray searches.'' Id. at 541 n.4.)
It is a myth. And for good reason. Law Dawg's post gives the case law, I provided some more. And note this all pre-dates the Patriot Act and whatnot.
You are clammoring for a "lost liberty" you never had and I would argue you should not have, namely, the ability to enter a nation at will simply on your sayso that you are a U.S. citizen with no further inquiry.
Last edited by cynicalflyer; Dec 31, 2007 at 7:43 am
Dec 31, 2007, 7:41 am
#161
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Doha, Qatar
Programs: Air Canada Aeroplan, Lufthansa Miles & More, Flying Blue, Hyatt Gold Passport
Posts: 1,894
1) Removing a wheel to have look in the wheel well is "routine" and does not require probable cause
2) drilling a hole in the door is not "routine" and does require probable cause
The Arnold ruling was held up on Appeal in October, and another ruling in Vermont also has confirmed that looking at your computer files is at least as personally intrusive (and arguably more so) as having a look up your back side and most definitely requires probable cause. And again, the case also established that finding pictures of nude ADULTS does not provide probable cause that there are likely to be illegal pictures of minors on the same hard drive. (Other cases have also established that nude pictures of minors are not by definition pornography, but that's another issue).
In any case your assertion that a CBP officer at a POE can pretty much do whatever they want could not be further from the truth, and their power explictly does not entitle them to go looking in people's laptops.
Dec 31, 2007, 7:52 am
#162
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Doha, Qatar
Programs: Air Canada Aeroplan, Lufthansa Miles & More, Flying Blue, Hyatt Gold Passport
Posts: 1,894
Nonsense. I go to Canada several times a year (I have a number of clients there). These trips are always short, frequently just overnight, and I hardly ever buy anything. Accordingly, my Customs declaration usually recites $0, and I've never, not once, had the least bit of trouble with Customs. I've never gotten a secondary. I've never been asked questions by Customs about what I did.
I don't know where you are getting this, as it's simply not true. I have clients all over the world, as well as associate firms and other offices in many different countries. I routinely ship documents, data CDs and data DVDs to these locations, and receive similar items back. I use Fedex, UPS and DHL. I've never had anything held up by Customs.
I don't know where you are getting this, as it's simply not true. I have clients all over the world, as well as associate firms and other offices in many different countries. I routinely ship documents, data CDs and data DVDs to these locations, and receive similar items back. I use Fedex, UPS and DHL. I've never had anything held up by Customs.
Dec 31, 2007, 8:18 am
#163
Join Date: Sep 2006
Programs: CO Plat, Priority Club Plat, HH Diamond, Avis First, Hertz #1Gold
Posts: 720
Dec 31, 2007, 8:22 am
#164
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: First Terrace of Purgatory (look it up)
Posts: 320
Excellent law school review on this very subject: http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawrev...04_coletta.pdf
Look at vassilipan going and raising the bar and level of discourse!
Dec 31, 2007, 8:26 am
#165
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Doha, Qatar
Programs: Air Canada Aeroplan, Lufthansa Miles & More, Flying Blue, Hyatt Gold Passport
Posts: 1,894
"That searches made at the border, pursuant to the longstanding right of the sovereign to protect itself by stopping and examining persons and property crossing into this country, are reasonable simply by virtue of the fact that they occur at the border, should, by now, require no extended demonstration."
United States v. Ramsey, 431 U.S. 606, 616 (1977)
The customs search in border or POE circumstances requires no warrant, no probable cause, not even the showing of some degree of suspicion that accompanies even investigatory stops.
Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132, 154 (1925); United States v. Thirty-Seven Photographs, 402 U.S. 363, 376 (1971); Almeida-Sanchez v. United States, 413 U.S. 266, 272 (1973).
And in United States v. Montoya de Hernandez, 473 U.S. 531 (1985) an approved warrantless detention incommunicado for more than 24 hours of traveler suspected of alimentary canal drug smuggling was held firm.
These pretty much speak for themselves. While there are rights to some degree at the border they are not what people think they are entitled to, for the most part.
United States v. Ramsey, 431 U.S. 606, 616 (1977)
The customs search in border or POE circumstances requires no warrant, no probable cause, not even the showing of some degree of suspicion that accompanies even investigatory stops.
Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132, 154 (1925); United States v. Thirty-Seven Photographs, 402 U.S. 363, 376 (1971); Almeida-Sanchez v. United States, 413 U.S. 266, 272 (1973).
And in United States v. Montoya de Hernandez, 473 U.S. 531 (1985) an approved warrantless detention incommunicado for more than 24 hours of traveler suspected of alimentary canal drug smuggling was held firm.
These pretty much speak for themselves. While there are rights to some degree at the border they are not what people think they are entitled to, for the most part.