This is ridiculous. Why are they even searching their phone? Many Americans travel to Europe without having their phones searched. We do not want to become that kind of scary country to travel to, especially not the kind of shithole country where you have to be afraid not to offend dear leader.
> We do not want to become that kind of scary country to travel to
It is too late for this. The common policy for researchers going to the US for conferences is to use a burner laptop with nothing but a PowerPoint file. That is the official requirements for public research institutions (which this person should have followed). Just like we do for China and we used to do for Russia. It does not make headlines every time, but a lot of us know a couple of people whose laptops were taken away for searching it. Personally I have also been using a burner phone for a few years (I should say that I had been, because all my scheduled trips to the US this year were cancelled).
> especially not the kind of shithole country where you have to be afraid not to offend dear leader
Before, providing social media handles was a nuisance (and I was never questioned about them). Now it’s scary.
Same for the questions about terrorism. It used to be funny and over the top, but if liking a post about Luigi Mangione is terrorism then it puts the whole thing in a quite different light.
The search phones in Australia, they also absolutely do it in Europe. As in the U.S., not everyone is getting their devices searched. Travelers to Europe even get denied entry as well — but their home country’s foreign minister doesn’t typically get involved.
Intentionally or not you are definitely implying that specifics of the statements make this action correct. Saying you're not doing something is not quite the same thing as actually not doing it.
We're not getting more information. Border police refuse to talk to the press or provide any information. Trump's border chief, who was Greg Abbott's Texas border czar, is known as secretive and has ignored public records requests from the press.
Basically, he didn't say anything. At the entry point, he was asked to show his phone (unlocked) and computer. On one of them, in some messages he exchanged with a colleague, he was criticizing the politics of Trump in research and science. Then, he was threatened to be charged with terrorism, because his exchange with his colleague was 'hainous against Trump' and 'conspiracy ridden'. Charges were dropped after he was denied entry and his computed and phone confiscated.
edit: I see this has been now downvoted below zero, but the information posted here isn't in any of the official communications about it, so I think it's fair to ask where it came from, no?
The article is in French, but easily auto-translated (and it's the best non-biased source I found).
> "I learned with concern that a French researcher" on assignment for the French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) "who was traveling to a conference near Houston was denied entry to the United States before being expelled ," said the Minister of Higher Education and Research, Philippe Baptiste, in a statement sent to Agence France-Presse (AFP). "This measure was apparently taken by the American authorities because the researcher's phone contained exchanges with colleagues and friends in which he expressed a personal opinion on the Trump administration's research policy ," he added.
At some point we're going to have to debate where to run "western" scientific conferences. I can see Europe/Canada and US/Russia blocs emerging, I'm curious with whom other countries will align.
even before this, no one in my research group and from what I can tell broader related departments has any wish to go to the USA. We're all looking for alternatives. This includes a broad range of people from statistics/ML, to chemistry, to computer science folks.
Yeah I even see a lot of people within the U.S. refusing to travel to red states like Texas due to transgender rights or other non-progressive state laws.
It isn't enough for me to draw a conclusion, but it's enough for me to question this story which so far has only one side represented. If this comes down to the academic in question making social media posts that tripped FBI/Secret Service's "talking about killing the POTUS" or something similar, then yeah that's going to potentially raise flags at the border.
The rules don't change along with the president after all, just like people doing the same thing with Biden or Obama would have raised flags, this would too.
To be sure we'll have to wait and see the messages that are the focus of concern. What bothers me is that so many here are simply running with the headline and turning off their critical thinking because they (understandably) hate Trump's guts.
> The arrest continues a reported trend of temporary visa holders and visitors being detained by U.S. border officials on their way into the country amid heightened immigration enforcement under the Trump administration and concerns that free speech is no longer a defense when it comes to legal immigration status. // [...] U.S. authorities saw these messages as "hate and conspiracy messages," which prompted an FBI investigation that was later dropped. However, the researcher was sent back to France. // CBP's move to deny entry to a foreign national seemingly solely based on their opinion of the president, rather than necessarily expressing ill will or intentions to harm him, comes amid increased scrutiny of those entering the country. // Legal permanent residents, along with those on work-based visas, have been questioned, detained and even removed from the country in recent weeks, including two German tourists and a Canadian woman trying to renew her visa at the southwest border. // Immigration attorneys have begun advising clients to ensure their social media profiles are free of criticism of the administration and images that could be seen as inappropriate or in support of ideas that do not fit with current U.S. foreign policy.
If that's true then there's absolutely no chance of me visiting the US ... possibly again!
A shame, as wanted to drive the Californian coastal roads in a year or two ... guess I'll stick to the Alps.
But let's be honest. Even I was let in, I wouldn't choose to now and ... I guess perhaps forever. Many many good people in the USA but your democracy has spoken. You want Biff in charge and no one wants to be a part of that.
I jokingly mentioned something like that to my wife when Trump was elected. Now, given the current circumstances, I may not get another chance to visit the US. Still, I’m grateful for the time I spent in California, the people I met, and all the beautiful roads I had the chance to explore.
Forever? It's four years and the flip will flop back to the other side. Funny how the rest of the world immediately hates America when we decide we are tired of paying the largest share for the security of Europe for 80 years, or we are tired of our immigration laws being ignored, or we are tired of having our middle class jobs shipped overseas. People only like us for our money, weapons, and jobs. They want the benefits of American culture and capitalism without any of the responsibility.
Its easy to give your citizens free healthcare and college when taxpayers over in America forgo all of that to subsidize your country's security.
> when taxpayers over in America forgo all of that...
Are you really claiming that if the US stopped subsidizing security overseas, American voters and politicians would suddenly begin to support "free healthcare and college" in the US? Your claim is that it's a _budget issue_?
Every time you see something like this in the headlines, I’d like you to have this thought in the back of your mind: “We have a king. Disrespecting the king must be punished.”
Use that as a reminder that you no longer live in a true representative republic or anything like it, no matter what superficial performative aspects remain. Fundamentally, the USA is now ruled by a King, not a President.
It will remind you of what conservatives (“the right”) are fundamentally about: conserving the power of the king and keeping the accumulated wealth of the nobility safe.
You’re watching the birth of a new American Empire of North Pacifica that includes the Kingdom of Canada, the Kingdom of Panama and the Kingdom of Greenland. These will be ruled by princes and princesses that all have the Trump surname.
Again, remember, that the King is openly calling for war to enlarge his kingdom into an empire and the nobles are falling in line.
No one has dared question this or to depose the king.
With regard to your idea, be reminded that Niall Ferguson already eight years ago stated that he was awakened by a friend's joke, "Make America Great Britain Again": he wrote a nice article about the monarchist model already apparent at the time.
I must warn you, though, that the drives remain undercurrents moving in history, and also Europe is living them: do note for example that the idea of "being tracked in all your monetary transactions """for some common good""" " is the translation of free people into "subjects". So: there are concepts about the population and the State that get instantiated in history by political forces and general powers.
Most big protests in the US happen in the summer, so I think it's worth considering that the large-scale resistance by the populace may actually happen in a few months. I am unclear on what this would look like, for example what level of organization, how regionally distributed, and what level of underlying violence (even peaceful protests) a subset of the protesters will carry out.
One major risk of a peaceful protest that has even a small amount of violence (property damage, etc) is that Trump actively wants to call out the military to break some skulls... and if there is violence, it's hard for the larger community to support the protests (even if the vast majority of people are simply expressing their legal rights to push back against what appears to be a truly tyrannical, unconstitutional government).
I hope you're right, but the thing I find most distressing about what's happening is how many people are in favor of it. Protests are for converting popular support into official actions. Trump won about half the votes. He didn't seize power in a coup or by holding the legislature at gunpoint. The people gave it to him. Some of those people may have changed their minds since then, but it doesn't seem like there are very many of them.
The real problem isn't Trump, it's the huge number of Americans who think what's happening is great. I don't know how you fix that.
I mean honestly even most kings aren’t that oversensitive; you’re really just looking at Thailand. Even fucking Putin isn’t really _this_ thin-skinned. Closest parallel I can think of is maybe Kim Jong Un?
Eh, SCOTUS still has a big opportunity to reign in the power he claims. The district courts are already doing their thing.
Arbitrarily searching and refusing foreign nationals at the border was always an executive power and we have temporarily chosen one who despises anyone not loyal to him. We get to reap the consequences for the next four years.
What do you mean reign in? Last year they in a shocking overturn of centuries of political thought came to the finding that the presidential is immune from criminal prosecution for his acts as president and then offered no actual guidance on how to determine whether an act was "as president".
They already said he has total immunity for official acts. What are they going to do when they ask him to stop doing something and he doesn't? It's not like they can punish him for it.
Call me hysteric, but I think if this is true - as described - it will be a slippery slope into much worse things.
If this is allowed, sooner than later the US will start to deny entry to all "undesirables", which translates to those that aren't 100% aligned with MAGA policies.
Just demand access to all phone data, run the data through some AI screening tool, which maps the data to some 2-D "desirability" scale.
Disagrees with Trump? No entry
Not opposed to LGBTQ topics? No entry
Reads too many left-leaning newspapers? No entry
And the list goes on.
I guess the (now at least 10 year old) tip still rings true: Travel with a burner phone, or some phone that you use minimally for anything other than travel.
A slippery slope I think describes it pretty well.
Right now it's an unflattering opinion of the current administration, being penalized without regard for the combined precedent of all previous administrations.
The kind of precedent that was within reach of all other US presidents from all parties continuously both before & after the Statue of Liberty got here, otherwise there wouldn't have been enough respect built in Europe for Liberty to be erected to begin with. It was obviously supposed to be a permanent icon representing the never-ending March of Freedom & Democracy, and only a real bozo could screw that up.
Yup, only an anti-American effort of some kind could drop the ball on that, and it's no accident.
What does it take before the same penalty applies for "lack of verifiable enthusiastic support of the current regime"?
Or "failure to make financial contributions to the party"?
Or even "providing insufficient information on associates who may not enthusiastically support the regime"?
It's not a slippery slope and if it was, you are at the bottom. It's more of a cliff and you already walked right off. ICE is kidnapping lawful residents and disappearing them to slave camps in the third world. Rogue U.S. Marshals deputies are occupying the premises of private businesses. The Secretary of Commerce is telling the public to buy shares of Tesla, on live TV. Reality has already hit bottom. If it feels like a slope, that is the unwillingness of people to admit it.
It is, and we are pretty close to the bottom. Civil liberties folks have been calling it out for decades. Congress has delegated far too much power to the President. Trump is testing and sometimes exceeding the boundaries of his power, but most of this stuff is legal. The executive shouldn't be able to unilaterally slap tariffs on things, but it can. The law should spell out the criteria for foreigners to be allowed to enter the country, but instead we give the executive total discretion, and the executive has granted the individual agents total discretion.
It was pretty clear for a long time that this stuff was ripe for abuse, and the President's own choices were the only thing preventing it from being abused more than it was.
Well, you put a fundamentally terrible* and vindictive person in that office, and surprise, he abuses this power. One of his first acts in office in 2017 was to abuse his ability to unilaterally dictate which foreigners are allowed to enter the country, no surprise it's even worse now. Despite this, there has been pretty much zero serious advocacy for restraining the power of the executive.
*All US presidents are terrible to some degree or another, but normally it's "I know what's best for the country and I'm willing to kill for it." Which isn't great, but it's better than this.
Do people have experience traveling with burner phones to the US and how border control may treat them if they request them? Considering that border officers seem to be able to deny entry for arbitrary reasons despite visas acquired etc, and the fact that even requesting the unlock of one's phone signals suspicion from their part, I would be afraid to offer any more suspicion of hiding sth. Do people just use a brand new phone, or they try to make it look like it has been used for some time?
> Do people have experience traveling with burner phones to the US and how border control may treat them if they request them?
I used to do that and luckily they never asked to unlock them. What will happen now is anyone’s guess, but it is very difficult to imagine that the current shambles won’t embolden power-tripping border cops. There are reports of tourists being held in chains and being held in detention for days.
> I would be afraid to offer any more suspicion of hiding sth
So would I, which is why I won’t be going to the US anytime soon. It’ll be a shame not to see my American friends.
Border protection officers have always had a lot of power. Before, there was an understanding that they would behave sensibly and everything was predictable: if you had a visa or a waiver, you were in. Now, who can say?
Not having a phone, or having a burner is even more suspicious, comrade. Remember CBP doesn't need a reason, they have jailed me before as a citizen without even an arrest. You have basically no rights at the border.
If you want to talk about slippery slopes the one that scares me most is deportation of what Trump calls "bad hombres" to prisons in El Salvador — without any due process. No matter how bad the "hombres", they must be given due process. Without that anyone that the president decides can be sent directly to prison.
Shit even this is downplaying how bad that is, and what a bad sign it is. This isn't deportation the way I think most people understand it, they weren't sent back to their original country or a place that recognizes them as nationals. The united states is selling people into slavery to an allied state.
It's indeed a slippery slope. Ironically, USA, once the country of freedom of speech is becoming increasingly more reminiscent of the Soviet Union or China and their lack of freedom of speech.
> [...] Following his detainment, it's reported that his professional and personal equipment was reportedly confiscated, and the researcher was sent back to Europe the next day.
Readit News
I'm not implying anything, but anyone could have written a news piece like that.
Deleted Comment
It is too late for this. The common policy for researchers going to the US for conferences is to use a burner laptop with nothing but a PowerPoint file. That is the official requirements for public research institutions (which this person should have followed). Just like we do for China and we used to do for Russia. It does not make headlines every time, but a lot of us know a couple of people whose laptops were taken away for searching it. Personally I have also been using a burner phone for a few years (I should say that I had been, because all my scheduled trips to the US this year were cancelled).
> especially not the kind of shithole country where you have to be afraid not to offend dear leader
Before, providing social media handles was a nuisance (and I was never questioned about them). Now it’s scary.
Same for the questions about terrorism. It used to be funny and over the top, but if liking a post about Luigi Mangione is terrorism then it puts the whole thing in a quite different light.
The UK will deny entry over social media posts.
Let’s just please be factual.
edit: I see this has been now downvoted below zero, but the information posted here isn't in any of the official communications about it, so I think it's fair to ask where it came from, no?
> "I learned with concern that a French researcher" on assignment for the French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) "who was traveling to a conference near Houston was denied entry to the United States before being expelled ," said the Minister of Higher Education and Research, Philippe Baptiste, in a statement sent to Agence France-Presse (AFP). "This measure was apparently taken by the American authorities because the researcher's phone contained exchanges with colleagues and friends in which he expressed a personal opinion on the Trump administration's research policy ," he added.
At some point we're going to have to debate where to run "western" scientific conferences. I can see Europe/Canada and US/Russia blocs emerging, I'm curious with whom other countries will align.
It isn't enough for me to draw a conclusion, but it's enough for me to question this story which so far has only one side represented. If this comes down to the academic in question making social media posts that tripped FBI/Secret Service's "talking about killing the POTUS" or something similar, then yeah that's going to potentially raise flags at the border.
The rules don't change along with the president after all, just like people doing the same thing with Biden or Obama would have raised flags, this would too.
To be sure we'll have to wait and see the messages that are the focus of concern. What bothers me is that so many here are simply running with the headline and turning off their critical thinking because they (understandably) hate Trump's guts.
https://www.newsweek.com/french-scientist-banned-us-entry-me...
> The arrest continues a reported trend of temporary visa holders and visitors being detained by U.S. border officials on their way into the country amid heightened immigration enforcement under the Trump administration and concerns that free speech is no longer a defense when it comes to legal immigration status. // [...] U.S. authorities saw these messages as "hate and conspiracy messages," which prompted an FBI investigation that was later dropped. However, the researcher was sent back to France. // CBP's move to deny entry to a foreign national seemingly solely based on their opinion of the president, rather than necessarily expressing ill will or intentions to harm him, comes amid increased scrutiny of those entering the country. // Legal permanent residents, along with those on work-based visas, have been questioned, detained and even removed from the country in recent weeks, including two German tourists and a Canadian woman trying to renew her visa at the southwest border. // Immigration attorneys have begun advising clients to ensure their social media profiles are free of criticism of the administration and images that could be seen as inappropriate or in support of ideas that do not fit with current U.S. foreign policy.
Dead Comment
A shame, as wanted to drive the Californian coastal roads in a year or two ... guess I'll stick to the Alps.
But let's be honest. Even I was let in, I wouldn't choose to now and ... I guess perhaps forever. Many many good people in the USA but your democracy has spoken. You want Biff in charge and no one wants to be a part of that.
Tofino, or Haida Gwaii.
Its easy to give your citizens free healthcare and college when taxpayers over in America forgo all of that to subsidize your country's security.
Are you really claiming that if the US stopped subsidizing security overseas, American voters and politicians would suddenly begin to support "free healthcare and college" in the US? Your claim is that it's a _budget issue_?
Use that as a reminder that you no longer live in a true representative republic or anything like it, no matter what superficial performative aspects remain. Fundamentally, the USA is now ruled by a King, not a President.
It will remind you of this fun law: https://amp.abc.net.au/article/104135048
It will remind you of what conservatives (“the right”) are fundamentally about: conserving the power of the king and keeping the accumulated wealth of the nobility safe.
You’re watching the birth of a new American Empire of North Pacifica that includes the Kingdom of Canada, the Kingdom of Panama and the Kingdom of Greenland. These will be ruled by princes and princesses that all have the Trump surname.
Again, remember, that the King is openly calling for war to enlarge his kingdom into an empire and the nobles are falling in line.
No one has dared question this or to depose the king.
If the king wills it, then war it is.
I must warn you, though, that the drives remain undercurrents moving in history, and also Europe is living them: do note for example that the idea of "being tracked in all your monetary transactions """for some common good""" " is the translation of free people into "subjects". So: there are concepts about the population and the State that get instantiated in history by political forces and general powers.
One major risk of a peaceful protest that has even a small amount of violence (property damage, etc) is that Trump actively wants to call out the military to break some skulls... and if there is violence, it's hard for the larger community to support the protests (even if the vast majority of people are simply expressing their legal rights to push back against what appears to be a truly tyrannical, unconstitutional government).
The real problem isn't Trump, it's the huge number of Americans who think what's happening is great. I don't know how you fix that.
Are you kidding?
What's the rate of "accidental" defenestrations amongst billionaires in Russia?
One in ten or so?
Arbitrarily searching and refusing foreign nationals at the border was always an executive power and we have temporarily chosen one who despises anyone not loyal to him. We get to reap the consequences for the next four years.
If this is allowed, sooner than later the US will start to deny entry to all "undesirables", which translates to those that aren't 100% aligned with MAGA policies.
Just demand access to all phone data, run the data through some AI screening tool, which maps the data to some 2-D "desirability" scale.
Disagrees with Trump? No entry
Not opposed to LGBTQ topics? No entry
Reads too many left-leaning newspapers? No entry
And the list goes on.
I guess the (now at least 10 year old) tip still rings true: Travel with a burner phone, or some phone that you use minimally for anything other than travel.
Right now it's an unflattering opinion of the current administration, being penalized without regard for the combined precedent of all previous administrations.
The kind of precedent that was within reach of all other US presidents from all parties continuously both before & after the Statue of Liberty got here, otherwise there wouldn't have been enough respect built in Europe for Liberty to be erected to begin with. It was obviously supposed to be a permanent icon representing the never-ending March of Freedom & Democracy, and only a real bozo could screw that up.
Yup, only an anti-American effort of some kind could drop the ball on that, and it's no accident.
What does it take before the same penalty applies for "lack of verifiable enthusiastic support of the current regime"?
Or "failure to make financial contributions to the party"?
Or even "providing insufficient information on associates who may not enthusiastically support the regime"?
It was pretty clear for a long time that this stuff was ripe for abuse, and the President's own choices were the only thing preventing it from being abused more than it was.
Well, you put a fundamentally terrible* and vindictive person in that office, and surprise, he abuses this power. One of his first acts in office in 2017 was to abuse his ability to unilaterally dictate which foreigners are allowed to enter the country, no surprise it's even worse now. Despite this, there has been pretty much zero serious advocacy for restraining the power of the executive.
*All US presidents are terrible to some degree or another, but normally it's "I know what's best for the country and I'm willing to kill for it." Which isn't great, but it's better than this.
I used to do that and luckily they never asked to unlock them. What will happen now is anyone’s guess, but it is very difficult to imagine that the current shambles won’t embolden power-tripping border cops. There are reports of tourists being held in chains and being held in detention for days.
> I would be afraid to offer any more suspicion of hiding sth
So would I, which is why I won’t be going to the US anytime soon. It’ll be a shame not to see my American friends.
Border protection officers have always had a lot of power. Before, there was an understanding that they would behave sensibly and everything was predictable: if you had a visa or a waiver, you were in. Now, who can say?
https://www.lbc.co.uk/world-news/diplomatic-row-french-trump...
> [...] Following his detainment, it's reported that his professional and personal equipment was reportedly confiscated, and the researcher was sent back to Europe the next day.
Dead Comment
Dead Comment