ESpen36

Yes, that is the point I was trying to make.

Even though the U.S. Govt usually does not examine passports in person upon departure (except occasionally on the jetbridge), government (DHS/CBP) officials DO receive passport/pax manifest data electronically from the airlines to compare against various lists.

polonius

That was my understanding concerning "emergency" passports as well -- that they were issued abroad to enable Americans who lost their passports to get home. But the information in this thread and several other recent threads makes it clear that the USA also issues such passports to Americans who are already in the USA in order to enable them to make "emergency" travel abroad. I presume this would include things like people going to hospitals or funerals of relatives who were ill or had deceased, but I don't know what the State Dept considers an "emergency" for purposes of travel abroad.

If this is true, whilst a six month validity period might be appropriate for purposes of returning to the USA (in fact, you could probably enter on an expired passport), if they are issuing such passports for the purpose of travel abroad, they should issue them with a validity period that actually makes them usable.

polonius

Deny the ability to travel to who? US authorities can check manifests against outstanding arrest warrants, and unfortunately, also deny travel to men with unpaid child support, but other than that there is no legislation that gives them any authority to hinder anyone's Constitutionally-protected right to travel. The USA isn't Saudi Arabia, where they can bar you from leaving for unpaid parking tickets -- your right to leave whenever you choose is pretty much absolute.

Aldoman

Do they actively search for visa overstayers or fugitives? most of the exit controls around the world are established to detain visa over-stayers and people who have a warrant. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't thing that if the airline agent sees a visa overstay, they tattle to the CBP to have him arrested. Then I would say the US has a defacto exit control.

It's not the same having a guard in a tower verifying that people get out of a city efficiently than the same guard at the point of entry to the city checking papers and allowing them to go out. Completely different things.

ESpen36

Um...the airline doesn't tattle to anyone. It's completely automated. If the passport number doesn't "clear" the various lists/databases, the system will not issue the boarding pass (or won't print the mandatory "DOCS OK"). It's out of the airline's hands (and the airline would get in a lot of trouble if it tried to circumvent these mandatory checks).


Interesting analogy. Of course, in the world of air travel, you're talking about a departure immigration checkpoint, where all travelers must show documents to law enforcement, be "cleared" and not subject to warrants, etc., and then be kept separate from other travelers until they board their flight. That's how many countries do it. Another important thing is that these airports with exit immigration usually do not allow travelers to leave the secured international departure area once they have entered, because legally they already left the country.

But the USA has a more liberal system. It might be less secure than forcing all departing international passengers to walk through a sterile corridor and past an immigration inspector. But, the basic result is the same--people who should not leave the country cannot fly because they cannot obtain a boarding pass. So, the system is efficient by using infrastructure already in place (all pax need a boarding pass), and also saves airports from having to quarantine departing international pax instead of mixing them with domestic pax.

Our system essentially does more of the checking electronically using the labor of airline agents (who swipe the passports), instead of having government-operated checkpoints. But the databases are the same.

GoingAway

Why unfortunately? Deadbeats being stopped is a good thing IMO - but not yours, interesting.

mbstone

Not every child support obligor is a "deadbeat" except in the view of politicians and other sloganeers.

DoS does not issue passports to, and has the legal authority to revoke passports of, child support obligors who are more than $5,000 in arrears. The DoS has said in the past that it does not as yet revoke passports as opposed to merely refusing their issuance. There is nothing on the DoS web site contradicting this. Up to now, I have not heard of any U.S. national who is in arrears in his child support and who possesses an apparently valid passport being refused permission to travel overseas, for example at an airport ticket counter. As far as I know, DoS merely refuses issuance upon application for an original or renewal passport. Does anyone here know for sure otherwise? I realize it is a federal offense to travel in interstate or foreign commerce with the intent to evade payment of more than $5,000 in unpaid child support. However, as a practical matter, if such a person were subject to denial of boarding of an international flight at a U.S. airport, is there any reason why he couldn't just take a cab to the Tijuana airport and go wherever?

ESpen36

Nope, there's no reason why he couldn't. And I'm sure it happens all the time.

mbstone

I think you're wrong. If there was a Your-Papers-Are-Not-In-Order list there would be about as many false positives as with the No-Fly list, and we would be hearing about the incidents all the time on this forum.

catocony

There are no exit requirements from the US. The airlines check to see if you have everything you need to enter wherever you're going for two reasons. One, as stated, if they put you on a plane to wherever and you don't have a visa, they have to fly you back home for free - although you'll probably never get your flight refunded, it's not really free. The second part is, they may be fined by the destination country. Brasil hits airlines with a hefty fine - I've heard as high as US$10,000 - for anyone landing there without a valid passport/visa.

There is no exit controls for either citizens or foreign nationals. Those unused US-EXIT machines at the airports attest to this. Foreign nationals are supposed to turn in their entry cards from their arrival forms when they get their bording pass for their departing flight, but I have no idea what the airlines do with them.

So, back to the OPs question. Say he's a dual citizen. When going to his local US airport to get his boarding pass, he should use his FOREIGN passport, as long as it's valid. That guarantees no problems with visas or anything of the sort, as he won't need one to enter his destination country since he's a citizen there.

On return, use your US passport all the way from check-in to immigration/customs here, except for possibly outbound immigration in your home country.

I'll use Brasil as an example, with a slight twist. My ex is a dual citizen - Portugal and Brasil. When she used to come here, when departing Brasil she would check-in with her PORTUGUESE passport to get her boarding pass. Why? Portugal is visa-waiver, so she can come here any time on that passport. Brasilians need a visa, which is a major hassle and nearly impossible to get. But, since she's a dual citizen, that's not an issue.

Now, after getting her boarding pass, she would go through outbound Brasilian immigration in Rio, and use her BRASIL passport. Why? Active outbound immigration, they don't care where your going, they just care how long you've been in Brasil and if you paid your departure tax. She had to use her Brasil passport since she had no entry stamp/form for Brasil.

When she got to the gate and they checked passports again, it's back to the PORTUGUESE passport, which is what she uses to enter the US.

When she landed, she used the 94-W form as a visa waiver, and presented her PORTUGUESE passport, return ticket receipt and 94-W to immigration, who let her in. Got her bags, gave up her customs form, and came on through.

On departure, she only used her BRASIL passport. She would take the entry card out of her PORTUGUESE passport, that she used for entry, and hand it to the counter agent, who would then swipe her BRASIL passport. Then, if there was another check at the US airport, she would again produce her BRASIL passport. On arrival back in Rio, she would only use her BRASIL passport and breeze right on through immigration.

So basically, use whichever passport is easiest for each step. In the OP's case, always use just the foreign passport when leaving the US. On the way back, use the US passport to get boarding passes and of course when arriving at whatever airport in the US. Use the foreign passport only for outbound immigration at the foreign airport.

polonius

Yes, exactly. You use the passport that you will use to ENTER the destination country at the airline counter, NOT the passport you will use to EXIT the departure country.

Airlines checks are NOT a departure check, and the USA does NOT (except for occaisional random jetway checks) have exit controls.

polonius

You want me to answer WHY it is unfortunate that places like Saudi Arabia stop people from leaving for unpaid parking tickets, etc.?


If you like their system so much, why don't you move there?

GoingAway

Where did this rant come from? and what the heck does anything have to do with an unpaid parking ticket or Saudi Arabia of all places? Geez.
My post is in response to an post regarding folks that don't pay child support having some privileges knicked. Seems a few here disagree on the point, but I'll stand my view.

polonius

You will be prevented from leaving Saudi Arabia for an unpaid parking ticket -- which, judging by your expressed opinion that there is nothing wrong with preventing "deadbeats" from travelling, is in your view, a good thing. So again, if you think being tough on "deadbeats" is so great, why don't you move there?

And since when is the right to travel a "privilege"?

ESpen36

Depends on the context. Within the USA, if you are a citizen/resident, travel is a right protected by the Constitution (under most circumstances).

But for foreign travel, you need the permission of the Department of State. By applying successfully for a passport, you receive that permission. So, it is a privilege in that respect. Your passport--and therefore, permission to travel--could be revoked if you violate certain laws, even if you are outside the country when you do so.

Plus, as anybody who watches Law & Order knows, many criminals who make bail are required to surrender their passports in order to prevent flight to a non-extradition country.