Hot answers tagged

19

The location of your residence entrance is irrelevant for the law, what matters most is your "street address", i.e. mailing address. That is the address (therefore city) that you use for voter registration, and basically how you identify "where I live". If you lives 5 miles out in the country in an unincorporated area, you'd still use Needles (e.g.) as you ...


10

It occurred to me after that the fence would have been at the edge of the Canadian landowners property and the land between the fence and the border was a road allowance on crown land. This is one possibility, others are: The border post is in the wrong place The fence is in the wrong place Both are in the wrong place The US rancher owns land in Canada as ...


10

Reports I've seen are that these seed shipments have false customs declarations, claiming that they contain something else, e.g. this one which was declared as "ring". That would violate 18 USC 542: Whoever enters or introduces, or attempts to enter or introduce, into the commerce of the United States any imported merchandise by means of any ...


8

Or is there a strip of land there which is national land reserved for border patrol purposes? There is a six-meter wide "border vista" under the authority of the International Boundary Commission. (Six meters is a bit less than twenty feet.) The Commission is headed by two commissioners -- an American and a Canadian. If you own land within the vista you ...


7

Citizens likely have an absolute right to enter the US. This hasn't been addressed directly by the Supreme Court, but here are some cases that come close. The Fifth Circuit, in William Worthy, Jr. v. US, 328 F.2d 386 (5th Cir. 1964): We think it is inherent in the concept of citizenship that the citizen, when absent from the country to which he owes ...


6

I understand that you are wondering why illegal immigrants are not more often deported by the authorities. This answer has grown a bit out of proportion because I also try to explore the general refugee situation. That seems appropriate because the large number of migrants makes the question of deportation more pressing. We would not be very concerned about ...


5

The immediate explanation is the substantial eastward jog created by Suisun and Grizzly Bay. This would follow from 33 CFR 2.20, defining the territorial sea baseline, following the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone. The zone would fall just short of Lake Tahoe. It's based on tidal waters, see 33 CFR 329.12 for similar definition of ...


4

There is a legal concept of de minimis: the idea that some offenses, civil or criminal, are too small to be worth prosecuting. For example, a photograph of a city scene that incidentally captured part of a copyrighted billboard in one corner of the image infringes the copyright on that billboard. But if the copyright holder were to sue, it's virtually ...


4

Could this actually prevent the construction of something (i.e a wall) from being built, or perhaps delay the process? It could not prevent the construction of a wall from being built. It could slightly delay the process, but government eminent domain lawyers are very efficient and the immediate possession phase of eminent domain cases is very fast, so ...


4

Yes for individuals, and yes for vehicles. They're customs laws rather than immigration laws.


4

Without this person's consent, you can't. https://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/agency-agence/reports-rapports/pia-efvp/atip-aiprp/req-dem-info-eng.html Requests for personal information that is not the requester's must include signed, recent (less than one year old), written consent from the individual to whom the personal information belongs. In theory it might ...


3

You don't get do-overs at the border The instant they catch you, they can charge you with absolutely anything that applies. They apply the laws which apply in their country. It's easy to forget that they have multiple laws for what is basically the same thing. So even if one does not apply, another one will. If they don't get you for smuggling, they ...


3

If I attempt to carry such a product into the country, but then honestly declare it at the border (I would like to declare 10 kg of marijuana, sir), can I be prosecuted for attempted smuggling? This depends on the jurisdiction and its definition of "smuggling." In the US, as an example, smuggling implies fraud or "clandestine" action. Openly bringing a ...


3

The US has jurisdiction because you committed a crime in the US. Canada has jurisdiction because you committed a crime in Canada. As added complications, if you are a Mexican citizen then Mexico has jurisdiction and if your victim is Chinese then China has jurisdiction. If you get arrested on an Interpol warrant in Spain then Spain has jurisdiction. And so ...


3

That's a fascinating circumstance, but I would say it has limited bearing on you as a tenant, except for a couple of issues. I say this because landlord-tenant laws in most U.S. jurisdictions are a matter of state law, and litigation is handled at the county level. Exceptions that might apply are city-level ordinances, such as safety requirements; some ...


2

For most grounds of inadmissibility, most nonimmigrants are actually entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge before being removed from the US. See 8 CFR 235.3(b)(3): (3) Additional charges of inadmissibility. In the expedited removal process, the Service may not charge an alien with any additional grounds of inadmissibility other than section 212(...


2

The short answer is "no." The executive branch has broad discretionary authority to make a border entry refusal even if someone's paperwork is in order under immigration law. I don't have the chapter and verse of the authority in hand, but basically there is not a legally enforceable right of a non-citizen to enter enforceable under non-immigration law, ...


2

tl;dr According to the ACLU, who are experts on this… yes, it is perfectly legal for you to refuse to provide documentation or ID to border patrol, and your refusal cannot be used as a basis for reasonable suspicion of an immigration violation. The ACLU has a very helpful guide to your rights when questioned at Border Patrol checkpoints, whether fixed or ...


2

At an inland checkpoint, vehicles are stopped without individualized suspicion. The question quotes an unsourced statement from a Wikipedia article that US citizens are not required to produce documentation at such a checkpoint, but this statement is not necessarily correct. If someone claims to a Border Patrol officer that he is a US citizen, the officer ...


2

Let's start with the basic rule on pursuits. The law enforcement officers of one country have no authority to even enter another country, let alone pursue someone (which often involves very dangerous driving), let alone use force in that other country, without the permission of the other country. This permission can be ad hoc, but countries can also enter ...


2

So, after pleading guilty, would Torres-Perdomo have further judicial or administrative hearings before being physically removed to his home country? No. All that would have to be done is for DHS to arrange transportation to his home country from the USA. The guilty plea would consent to deportation without further hearing. The reason I wonder, is ...


2

It may very well be illegal, depending on the laws of the country. Most people have the right to enter their own country (except for practical problems, like not being able to prove you have the right) because you list your passport and/or other ID). But it may be illegal to enter outside official border crossings, for example. Or illegal to enter without ...


2

Regarding Germany, Austria, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway, details can be found on the Commission website. According to the table of all notifications, they all periodically invoke the “security situation in Europe and threats resulting from the continuous significant secondary movements”. This is obviously in blatant contradiction with article 25 but in ...


2

There is a long-standing border search exception to the usual 4th Amendment no-search protections, but there still are limits. As you know, warrantless searches are allowed when an arrest occurs in public and is based on probable cause, and searches and seizures of limited duration and intrusiveness may be allowed given reasonable suspicion of criminal ...


2

Promoting the comment to an answer based on the feedback. Canada is not going to extradite him but they may deport him if he committed any immigration fraud. Typically applications for Visa or Work Permit include many question on your history including "have you ever been convicted for a crime". So either he lied on the application or the Canada didn't ...


2

Lack of "authorised border crossing points" per Article 23 It's entirely possible that there are no authorised crossing points at the moment. The world is in the grip of a pandemic and there is no positive obligation on the Member State to list out authorised border crossing points if there aren't any. The Member State could choose to close the ...


1

It relies upon the cooperation of Canada This is not likely. In the absence of an extradition treaty, extradition is at the discretion of the host country. Canada, rightly or wrongly, does not see Iran’s judicial system as free, fair and impartial and, as such, they will generally not accept an Iranian court’s verdict as evidence of guilt. An example. The ...


1

It looks to me like such a thing is possible under 42 USC 265: Whenever the Surgeon General determines that by reason of the existence of any communicable disease in a foreign country there is serious danger of the introduction of such disease into the United States, and that this danger is so increased by the introduction of persons or property from such ...


1

It certainly depends on the country, but in some cases, the country's immigration authorities do not check the documents of people leaving the country, so there would be no problem. An example of such a country is the USA. In some cases one can leave by paying a fine, but these fines can be quite high. In other cases, the person might be detained and ...


1

If the demonstrators are US citizens, then no. The statute concerns only improper entry by aliens. They may be in violation of the customs reporting requirements described in the answer to the linked question.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible