US Citizen Crosses Border, Gets $10,000 Fine
Feb 10, 2004, 12:16 pm
#1
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Nashville -Past DL Plat, FO, WN-CP, various hotel programs
Programs: DL-MM, AA, SW w/companion,HiltonDiamond, Hyatt PLat, IHF Plat, Miles and Points Seeker
Posts: 11,165
US Citizen Crosses Border, Gets $10,000 Fine
More border-related stupidity...
Cross-Border Church Visit Costs Man $10,000
Tue February 10, 2004 07:49 AM ET
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=4324117
By Charles Grandmont
MONTREAL (Reuters) - Crossing the U.S.-Canada border to go to church on a Sunday cost a U.S. citizen $10,000 for breaching Washington's tough new security rules.
The expensive trip to church was a surprise for Richard Albert, a resident of rural Maine who lives so close to the Canadian border the U.S. customs office is right next door to his house.
Like the other half-dozen residents of Township 15 Range 15, crossing the border is a daily ritual for Albert. The nearby Quebec village of St. Pamphile is where they shop, eat and pray.
...
As a result, Albert says did not expect any problems three weeks ago when he returned home to the United States after attending mass in Canada, as usual.
The local U.S. customs station is closed on Sundays, so he just drove around the locked gate, as he had done every weekend since the gate appeared last May, following a tightening of border security.
Two days later, Albert was summoned to the customs office, where an officer told him he had been caught on camera crossing the border illegally.
Ottawa has granted special passes to some 300 U.S. citizens in that region so they can enter the country when Canadian customs posts are closed, but the United States canceled a similar program last May.
That forces local residents to make a 200-mile detour along treacherous logging roads to get home via the nearest staffed border checkpoint.
A spokeswoman for the U.S. Bureau of Customs and Border Protection would not comment specifically on Albert's case because of privacy laws.
"Since 9/11, we've enhanced our security and, yes, some of the situations require inconvenience to people, so we have to go along with what the regulations are," said Janet Rapaport, a public affairs officer with the bureau. She added that local residents had been told about the stricter controls.
Albert has appealed the fine, but he has not attended a Sunday mass since.
"I feel like I'm living in a jail," he said.
(I copied this from another board, but thought it was so insane, it needed exposure here)
Cross-Border Church Visit Costs Man $10,000
Tue February 10, 2004 07:49 AM ET
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=4324117
By Charles Grandmont
MONTREAL (Reuters) - Crossing the U.S.-Canada border to go to church on a Sunday cost a U.S. citizen $10,000 for breaching Washington's tough new security rules.
The expensive trip to church was a surprise for Richard Albert, a resident of rural Maine who lives so close to the Canadian border the U.S. customs office is right next door to his house.
Like the other half-dozen residents of Township 15 Range 15, crossing the border is a daily ritual for Albert. The nearby Quebec village of St. Pamphile is where they shop, eat and pray.
...
As a result, Albert says did not expect any problems three weeks ago when he returned home to the United States after attending mass in Canada, as usual.
The local U.S. customs station is closed on Sundays, so he just drove around the locked gate, as he had done every weekend since the gate appeared last May, following a tightening of border security.
Two days later, Albert was summoned to the customs office, where an officer told him he had been caught on camera crossing the border illegally.
Ottawa has granted special passes to some 300 U.S. citizens in that region so they can enter the country when Canadian customs posts are closed, but the United States canceled a similar program last May.
That forces local residents to make a 200-mile detour along treacherous logging roads to get home via the nearest staffed border checkpoint.
A spokeswoman for the U.S. Bureau of Customs and Border Protection would not comment specifically on Albert's case because of privacy laws.
"Since 9/11, we've enhanced our security and, yes, some of the situations require inconvenience to people, so we have to go along with what the regulations are," said Janet Rapaport, a public affairs officer with the bureau. She added that local residents had been told about the stricter controls.
Albert has appealed the fine, but he has not attended a Sunday mass since.
"I feel like I'm living in a jail," he said.
(I copied this from another board, but thought it was so insane, it needed exposure here)
Feb 10, 2004, 4:46 pm
#2
In Memoriam
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Switzerland/Atlanta,GA
Programs: Executive Club Gold/Frequence Plus Red
Posts: 1,756
Poor Albert. Baby Bush seems to have found a new way to reduce the deficit...
Why doesn't Albert in turn sue the government for endangering his life? After all, if the government leaves the borders unguarded, it knowingly eases the way for potential terrorists to enter the US and commit their crimes.
Why doesn't Albert in turn sue the government for endangering his life? After all, if the government leaves the borders unguarded, it knowingly eases the way for potential terrorists to enter the US and commit their crimes.
Feb 10, 2004, 5:43 pm
#3
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 940
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Why doesn't Albert in turn sue the government for endangering his life? After all, if the government leaves the borders unguarded, it knowingly eases the way for potential terrorists to enter the US and commit their crimes.</font>
If they do enforce the fine on him, then he and ever resident in the area should file a lawsuit against the government. He said up till that day he had passed that same border point countless time without a problem, how many terrorists could have gotten in?
Feb 11, 2004, 4:49 pm
#5
Join Date: May 2003
Location: GEG
Programs: Motel 6 Club Avoir Le Cafard
Posts: 5,027
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by whirledtraveler:
I don't think you can sue the government for such things. The way the system works, you are supposed to use your vote to change things. Ahem.</font>
I don't think you can sue the government for such things. The way the system works, you are supposed to use your vote to change things. Ahem.</font>
Feb 12, 2004, 11:24 am
#7
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Miami, FL
Programs: AA EXP/Marriott Plat/Hertz PC
Posts: 12,724
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by mbstone:
Sure you can. You can also have everybody in the congregation write to Congress which might be extremely effective.</font>
Sure you can. You can also have everybody in the congregation write to Congress which might be extremely effective.</font>
Feb 12, 2004, 9:51 pm
#8
Join Date: May 2003
Location: GEG
Programs: Motel 6 Club Avoir Le Cafard
Posts: 5,027
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by whirledtraveler:
That's a lawsuit? I think you misunderstood my post.
</font>
That's a lawsuit? I think you misunderstood my post.
</font>
Feb 13, 2004, 6:27 am
#9
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Miami, FL
Programs: AA EXP/Marriott Plat/Hertz PC
Posts: 12,724
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by mbstone:
No, I didn't. IAAL, and if I were local to the area I would be pleased to take his case under 42 USC § 1983 which allows people to sue government officials for being deprived of their civil rights (in this case freedom of religion and the right to travel) "under color of law." But he won't need a lawyer after the congresscritters get involved, that's my prediction.</font>
No, I didn't. IAAL, and if I were local to the area I would be pleased to take his case under 42 USC § 1983 which allows people to sue government officials for being deprived of their civil rights (in this case freedom of religion and the right to travel) "under color of law." But he won't need a lawyer after the congresscritters get involved, that's my prediction.</font>
Yeah, let's hope not. That problem needs to be solved. I can't imagine living in a small town where everyone is used to going back and forth several times a day over say a half mile's distance and getting that sort of ridiculous grief.
Feb 13, 2004, 10:00 am
#10
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 2,976
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by mbstone:
...42 USC § 1983 which allows people to sue government officials for being deprived of their civil rights (in this case freedom of religion and the right to travel) "under color of law."</font>
...42 USC § 1983 which allows people to sue government officials for being deprived of their civil rights (in this case freedom of religion and the right to travel) "under color of law."</font>
Don't get me wrong, I think this guy is getting the DHS shaft big time and I hope he prevails.
Feb 13, 2004, 2:16 pm
#11
In Memoriam
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Switzerland/Atlanta,GA
Programs: Executive Club Gold/Frequence Plus Red
Posts: 1,756
[/QUOTE]Just curious...since he was not prohibited from leaving the USA and violated regs upon re-entry is there a civil rights violation relative to freedom of travel? And his freedom of religion wasn't violated on US soil either.
Don't get me wrong, I think this guy is getting the DHS shaft big time and I hope he prevails.[/B][/QUOTE]
Which regs? He presented himself at the border, did not take a round about. Was it his fault if the border was closed? It is a violation to freedom of travel if I cannot enter my own country when I want to...
Freedom of religion too: It is not for the State to tell me to which church I have to go. If they prevent me from going again, at $10'000.- a shot, well, you infringe on my right to go TO and FROM church.
Don't get me wrong, I think this guy is getting the DHS shaft big time and I hope he prevails.[/B][/QUOTE]
Which regs? He presented himself at the border, did not take a round about. Was it his fault if the border was closed? It is a violation to freedom of travel if I cannot enter my own country when I want to...
Freedom of religion too: It is not for the State to tell me to which church I have to go. If they prevent me from going again, at $10'000.- a shot, well, you infringe on my right to go TO and FROM church.
Feb 16, 2004, 11:53 pm
#12
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,094
Denying an American the right to re-enter the US should be considered a civil rights violation.
I say this thinking that perhaps one day some wacko Administration may say, "For the security of the Fatherland, shut down all borders for ___ hours/days/weeks/months/years," and leave a bunch of Americans in limbo overseas.
I say this thinking that perhaps one day some wacko Administration may say, "For the security of the Fatherland, shut down all borders for ___ hours/days/weeks/months/years," and leave a bunch of Americans in limbo overseas.
Feb 17, 2004, 8:22 am
#13
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 58,000
If he wasn't fined $10,000 and there weren't other ridiculous trumped up charges and fines, this Homeland Insecurity Pyramid Scheme would collapse or would have to raise taxes.
We know this current administration is already on thin ice, projected to lose to just about anyone the Democrats put up. Raising taxes might clinch a loss of the White House for the Republicans - therefore victims must be found and money extorted.
However, just as communism and other types of totalitarian governments with pyramid-scheme infrastructures have collapsed, hopefully so shall go this current, despicable regime.
To paraphase the comedian John Pinette: "You go now!!! You been here 4 years!"
(Off-topic: if you're not familiar with John's comedy, check out: www.johnpinette.com/audio.asp and listen. It's very funny!)
Regime Change 2004
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
[This message has been edited by Spiff (edited Feb 17, 2004).]
We know this current administration is already on thin ice, projected to lose to just about anyone the Democrats put up. Raising taxes might clinch a loss of the White House for the Republicans - therefore victims must be found and money extorted.
However, just as communism and other types of totalitarian governments with pyramid-scheme infrastructures have collapsed, hopefully so shall go this current, despicable regime.
To paraphase the comedian John Pinette: "You go now!!! You been here 4 years!"
(Off-topic: if you're not familiar with John's comedy, check out: www.johnpinette.com/audio.asp and listen. It's very funny!)
Regime Change 2004
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
[This message has been edited by Spiff (edited Feb 17, 2004).]
Feb 17, 2004, 9:56 am
#14
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Posts: 331
The right to travel is only applicable to travel between states, not to the right to move in and out of the US. The right to travel is not specifically included in the US Constitution (although it was specified in the Articles of Confederation), but is generally accepted and cited in a number of Supreme Court decisions as well-settled law.
While the facts of this case are a bit much, the idea of unfettered movement is problematic - do we just leave the crossing open for anyone to use, citizen or not? Do we have to staff every border crossing 24 hours a day? Or do we have to put troops along the whole border so anyone can cross anywhere, any time?
It's so easy to say what shouldn't be done, but much harder to say what should be done.
While the facts of this case are a bit much, the idea of unfettered movement is problematic - do we just leave the crossing open for anyone to use, citizen or not? Do we have to staff every border crossing 24 hours a day? Or do we have to put troops along the whole border so anyone can cross anywhere, any time?
It's so easy to say what shouldn't be done, but much harder to say what should be done.
Feb 17, 2004, 10:12 am
#15
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 58,000
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by fcrit:
do we just leave the crossing open for anyone to use, citizen or not?</font>
do we just leave the crossing open for anyone to use, citizen or not?</font>
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by fcrit:
Do we have to staff every border crossing 24 hours a day?</font>
Do we have to staff every border crossing 24 hours a day?</font>
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry