If the tourist does not want to be groped, they will be asked if they wanted to fly today. If they do, they get the grope. If they refuse the grope, they do not fly. They are denied access, and will have to either take a bus or cruise ship to their final destination.

This is the way American Citizens are treated...so why should tourists get any special treatment?

Again that is not what I am talking about.

I am talking about the legal result between TSA and immigration when a torurist refuses nude scanning and being groped.

So what if the tourist cant afford the ship or the bus cause they have spent all their money in USA?


So AGAIN we are not talking about special treatment of tourists.

An american will not be deported out of their own country. But a leaving tourists can get stuck.

And they cant leave and they cant stay.

How *else* would it work?

Seems to me that's out of your control so the discussion is academic. (Maybe that's your point, I don't know.)

U.S. law applies to all in its jurisdiction, tourists included, whether you or I or anyone wish it otherwise. "Should" is irrelevant here except in the abstract.

That's not what you implied before.

That's simply, factually untrue that tourist could not leave since other means of transport are available. Affordability of alternate means of transport is a separate matter.

What do you mean by "that is out of my control"?

No I did not implied that toursits should have differnt rules. I was questioning how TSa handles certain episodes with immigration.Some young tourists have actually limited resources . And especially if they come from Europe.

The reason I asked the question is I do know that a lot of people come here without being groped and nude-scanned.
They dont even belive it could happen. But when they leave to go back home they are faced with it.
And of cause very upset.
So I just wanted to know what would happen if they refuse .

Agreed. I had a similar reply when someone asked about tourists departing the UK. There are options to leave the UK and to fly from countries not using WBI. And there are airports in the UK (perhaps even in England; definitely in Scotland and in Wales) which do not use WBI.

Do you know if Copenhagen, Denmark got scanners. If so are they mandatory?

I have not beeen able to find info on that. Only that they were going to get some.

You said: "I am thinking about the people who dont get warned and end up in a very odd confrontation with TSA." I understand your concern for others but the consequences of tourist-TSA conflicts are out of your control.

TSA has no responsibility or authorization to act on behalf of pax w/Immigration.

Also not the responsibility of the TSA, ICE, CBP or any other alphabet agency of the USA.

Please see Post #3. Whether you choose to believe the response is up to you but your beliefs won't change the validity of the answer. I am curious why you find TamCaP's answer incredulous, though.

Hmm...I'm not sure what you're talking about. I was sure most of the posts have covered every scenario. Lemme try this...

There are no legal barriers between TSA and Immigration, they are both DHS agencies and have to work together. Immigration will only get involved if the tourist has an invalid/expired Visa. If the tourist is here legally, Immigration can not do anything, and TSA will have the final decision. TSA will not allow the tourist to go beyond security to board their flight if they refuse the screening.

TSA does not care where the tourist goes, but they can't stay at the checkpoint, and they won't be allowed in. They can go back to their hotel, or live in the terminal lobby like Tom Hanks.

They can seek assistance from their embassy, call relatives in their home country to get a WesternUnion moneygram, or live in the streets eating out of garbage cans until their Visa expires. Once their Visa expires, they can turn themselves in to Immigration for free ticket (deportation) home. Before getting deported, they will be groped against their will, and they do not have a say in the matter.

Otherwise, they can live in hiding like the millions of other non-citizens living here. The majority of illegals living in the United States gain access by overstaying their tourist/student/work Visas.

The only options for a tourist in this situation is:

a) get groped and go home
b) don't get groped and live in the US illegally

Am I still misunderstanding something?

Yes that part about visas.

There is a lot countries that dont need visas for coming here to USA.
Only if they stay more than 3 months.
Other wise you understood.

Like LGW, at least for now (not sure when it's supposed to change).

To the point of the OP: the US hasn't been a friendly country for tourists and other foreign nationals for quite some time now. We are one of the more difficult of the 'free' countries to get into and it shows by our tourism numbers.

Up until very recently I spent every other weekend flying between the US and the UK (as a US citizen). It took me less time to enter the UK than it did to enter the US, even as a US citizen. Granted a large part of that is because of IRIS (in the UK) and the lack of Global Entry at my home airport (CLT), but it still is ridiculous.

Ok Thank you for claryfining all above. I just wondered about that. i didnt know if they worked together or what.

Europeans are used to this and more intrusive searches. I had one the other day that told me so.

Several of my European friends have said never again will they travel to the US because they're tired of being grilled and harassed every time they enter the US. And these are businessmen. Guess what; they've taken their business and their capital elsewhere.

Thank you CBP/DHS for contributing to the unemployment in the US.

I know it's highly off-topic, but would you care to elaborate? As an eu passport holder my usual border check on most European borders takes between 5 and 15 seconds (honestly!!!, add odd 5m for wait times).

I would also like an elaboration because I am in the 5 to 15 second category. Of the places that I have traveled, the US has far, far and away the most intrusive searches.