How much information is included in the APIS manifest? Surely enough to narrow down the description to less than "everyone boarding"... right?

If everyone was wearing a nametag, then they could just grab the person they were looking for.. Since airlines don't issue those, they checked everyones boarding pass. They can't pick people of a certain race/ethnic background based on name/information in APIS, so everyone gets checked.

As far as the guy refusing to answer their questions, customs has a right to do an outbound inspection. You can refuse, but you'd, more than likely, be detained. You can try to make their life difficult, but they can do it back to you 10 fold.

This has been going on for many years. ORD-AMS is one flight where this happens rather often and what they are doing is looking for undeclared cash by going on a fishing expedition for money, using the answers to questions to determine whether or not to search. It's also meant to intimidate, as if that stupid idea generally works against committed criminals.

This is part of one of those unending unwinnable "wars" that the US government likes to fight -- this being the "war on drugs"-related "war on money laundering".

They target certain routes more often than others and stick to it for a while and then move on for a bit and then return.

This doesn't keep "economies" safe. It doesn't even keep citizens safe on the flight. It's often -- on some routes, generally -- a waste of resources, a dog and pony show meant to intimidate and/or show that they are doing something.

These checks also often enough have nothing to do with looking for a specific named person, and is quite literally a fishing expedition done with a wide net that doesn't even ask to look at all (or even any) passengers' passports or otherwise have the passengers visually identify themselves with their name to the agent asking questions as part of a fishing expedition.

You are presuming something incorrectly in making your excuses for these fishing expeditions.

Contrary to your included claim above, names don't matter often (nor would nametags) because they aren't looking for a specific named person on the flights whose passengers are being subjected to these outbound control questions -- often they are looking for a "type" rather than a person whose name they already know.

Correct. It's quite common on US/Canadian outbound international flights.

Just remember, there is nothing wrong with taking out as much money as you want. You just have to declare it.

Not new, it's long been law that you must declare more than $10,000 in cash when carrying it out of the country. They aren't looking for average people that might have a bit more, they are looking for people laundering money by hand carrying $100,000+ dollars.



There are a lot of federal agencies tasked with enforcing all sorts of laws. There is a big difference between CBP, ICE, TSA, etc. I'm no fan of the TSA at all, but they're not "security guards."



I appreciate your sentiment, but in all probability, the only person who's life is made more difficult is your own. CBP and ICE officers are so used to people being evasive or nervous that they aren't phased or intimidated.

APIS contains most information found on your passport datapage but, as mentioned below, this may not be sufficient to narrow things down much.
--
13F

Governments need to walk a fine line to find the proper balance between security and facilitation of legitimate travel. Using ad hoc procedures, performing unexpected inspections and interviews, etc. are some of the tools governments have available. There is no one correct answer. Every single PAX could be interrogated and searched, but that would clearly be a waste of resources, and would deter travel due to the huge hassle factor. At the other end of the spectrum, governments could not screen anyone. I think we can agree that the answer lies somewhere in between these two extremes.

--
13F

The TSA are mostly security guards -- how much security they provide and how much of a demonstration of security they represent is another matter.

Yes, "TSA professionals" is something of an oxy-moron

This happened to me when I was leaving Manchester for the US. I'd just passed through security when I was approached and asked how long I'd been in the UK, what I'd done, and how much money I had on me.

One nice thing about Manchester is that when you give "planespotting" as a reason for visiting the area, they don't get more suspicious.

Yes, there are big differences. CBP and USCIS are federal law enforcement agencies. The officers who perform examinations are sworn Law Enforcement Officers will full arrest powers, as well as limited search/seizure powers beyond what normal cops have (because people and goods can be searched upon arrival without probable cause or a warrant).

TSA is also a federal agency, but it is not a law enforcement agency. TSO officers who screen travelers are not sworn officers and have no authority to detain or arrest people, or confiscate goods (except if travelers willingly surrender them in exchange for passage through the checkpoint).


So, my point is: if a CBP or USCIS officer finds a traveler with undeclared cash, or illegal drugs, or illegal weapons, he or she can seize those goods and possibly arrest the traveler if mere possession constitutes a violation of the law.

But, if a TSA screener finds a traveler with undeclared cash, or illegal drugs, or weapons, he or she cannot seize those goods...instead, he or she must contact Law Enforcement and turn over the goods to sworn officers when they arrive (usually airport police). At that time, the LEOs would decide whether to seize the goods only, or arrest the traveler as well.