Got any fruit?

[mtantillo]

I'm sure that it works just like customs where they are allowed to discriminate. Customs certainly treats someone from Afghanistan differently than someone from Canada or the US. In this case, it is likely a matter of, "wow, he came all the way from NY, he might have picked up something on his long journey", whereas the majority of those with Cali plates on Sunday on I-15 are coming from Vegas.

The sign on I-80 was a permanent BGS. Probably not the result of one inspector having a bad day, but rather a concerted effort to apply different procedures and/or different levels of screening to visitors vs. returning Californians.

[SSOWorld]

Every pass through an inspection station during my tenure in California last year resulted in no questions - the I-15 one was unmaned each time (3x), the I-10 one was closed as was the I-8 one.  What gets me is, there is none on I-5 NB in San Diego.  They must think Mexican fruit is good.  oh wait...

[sdmichael]

I'm not convinced that California's agricultural sector will even survive the next 50 years.  California's natural climate is a desert - the oasis is man-made, and the droughts are just getting worse every year.  As a resident of upstate NY, I do NOT want to see water from our (already shrinking) Great Lakes diverted to the west to support farming/cities in the desert that will always be incapable of getting enough water for themselves due to climate.

I don't think this could legally happen. There are international treaties that prevent Great Lakes water from being diverted outside of the Great Lakes watershed. Any changes would require approval from the governors of the Great Lakes states, the Premiers of Ontario and Quebec, and go through the international treaty ratification process. The only party that would be remotely interested is the US Federal Government. I'm sure all of the governors, premiers, and Canada would be strongly against it. 

Heck, there are treaties in place that limit the amount of diversion from Niagara Falls to the adjacent power stations for the sole purpose of preserving the view of the falls for tourists! Like heck Niagara Falls is going to give water to California!

That said, I've only been stopped once at a checkpoint (out of 3 times driving into California). They asked if I had any fresh fruits, where I was headed, and handed me a book of coupons for tourist attractions. This was on a Sunday afternoon, and there was lots of Vegas traffic. A whole bunch of cars ahead of me were waved through, but when the inspector spotted a New York State license plate on my car, he stopped me.

I didn't stop at the one on I-80 (I was heading east), but I did notice that they segregated traffic by license plate....California to one side, Out of State to the other.

Entering at I-8 and I-40, the stations were closed and you just drove through.

One of the few exceptions to the watershed rule is for the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, which causes some Great Lakes water to drain into the Mississippi River.

Google "NAWAPA" or "North American Water And Power"... you'd be amazed at what was proposed.

[Alex]

Rode through the one on I-40 yesterday in an AZ plated rental car and was simply waved through with "thank you."

[roadfro]

I didn't stop at the one on I-80 (I was heading east), but I did notice that they segregated traffic by license plate....California to one side, Out of State to the other.

Odd... maybe it's so that an inspector who's having a bad day only has to deal with people who know what's going on?

I'm sure that it works just like customs where they are allowed to discriminate. Customs certainly treats someone from Afghanistan differently than someone from Canada or the US. In this case, it is likely a matter of, "wow, he came all the way from NY, he might have picked up something on his long journey", whereas the majority of those with Cali plates on Sunday on I-15 are coming from Vegas.

The sign on I-80 was a permanent BGS. Probably not the result of one inspector having a bad day, but rather a concerted effort to apply different procedures and/or different levels of screening to visitors vs. returning Californians.

Not sure when you might have gone through the I-80/Truckee Ag inspection station... I've never seen cars split CA versus non-CA plates like this, and the permanent signs for this station simply divide up autos from trucks.

[J N Winkler]

I'm sure that it works just like customs where they are allowed to discriminate. Customs certainly treats someone from Afghanistan differently than someone from Canada or the US.

I don't think they are, in fact, allowed to discriminate--you don't lose protected-class status when you pass through Customs.  Different treatment of arrivals by national origin would be allowed under US anti-discrimination legislation if there were a rational basis for it that meets the strict-scrutiny test.  Customs has been raked over the coals by the Government Accountability Office for subjecting US citizens disproportionately to invasive searches when they are black, female, or both.

[vdeane]

I'm sure that it works just like customs where they are allowed to discriminate. Customs certainly treats someone from Afghanistan differently than someone from Canada or the US. In this case, it is likely a matter of, "wow, he came all the way from NY, he might have picked up something on his long journey", whereas the majority of those with Cali plates on Sunday on I-15 are coming from Vegas.

Customs has different entry rules for people based on nationality though.  CA doesn't.  The rules are the same for everyone, the only think different is how likely they are to be familiar with them.

The sign on I-80 was a permanent BGS. Probably not the result of one inspector having a bad day, but rather a concerted effort to apply different procedures and/or different levels of screening to visitors vs. returning Californians.

They can always move the inspectors to different booths...

[mtantillo]

I didn't stop at the one on I-80 (I was heading east), but I did notice that they segregated traffic by license plate....California to one side, Out of State to the other.

Odd... maybe it's so that an inspector who's having a bad day only has to deal with people who know what's going on?

I'm sure that it works just like customs where they are allowed to discriminate. Customs certainly treats someone from Afghanistan differently than someone from Canada or the US. In this case, it is likely a matter of, "wow, he came all the way from NY, he might have picked up something on his long journey", whereas the majority of those with Cali plates on Sunday on I-15 are coming from Vegas.

The sign on I-80 was a permanent BGS. Probably not the result of one inspector having a bad day, but rather a concerted effort to apply different procedures and/or different levels of screening to visitors vs. returning Californians.

Not sure when you might have gone through the I-80/Truckee Ag inspection station... I've never seen cars split CA versus non-CA plates like this, and the permanent signs for this station simply divide up autos from trucks.

12+ years ago.

[mtantillo]

I'm sure that it works just like customs where they are allowed to discriminate. Customs certainly treats someone from Afghanistan differently than someone from Canada or the US.

I don't think they are, in fact, allowed to discriminate--you don't lose protected-class status when you pass through Customs.  Different treatment of arrivals by national origin would be allowed under US anti-discrimination legislation if there were a rational basis for it that meets the strict-scrutiny test.  Customs has been raked over the coals by the Government Accountability Office for subjecting US citizens disproportionately to invasive searches when they are black, female, or both.

Someone from Mexico has to be vetted and get a visa (or border crossing card) before they can enter the country, but can enter through primary with the card. Someone from Canada does not need a visa, they just show up at the border, and are processed through primary. Anyone else has to go to secondary to do US Visit. Someone from a visa-waiver country can just show up, get waved to secondary, pay a fee, have prints taken, have photo taken, and be allowed to enter. Someone from Afghanistan must get a visa in advance and do all the US Visit procedures in secondary.  Someone tell me how that is not discrimination based on national origin. I would bet large sums of money that the person from Afghanistan who shows up at the border (even with a visa) gets a more thorough check than someone from Norway.

Maybe discrimination wasn't the right word. But they certainly have different procedures that are applied to different nationalities when you enter the country. This seems to be no more or less discrimination than California potentially having a different procedure for California residents vs. non-California residents, based on the license plate.

[J N Winkler]

Someone from Mexico has to be vetted and get a visa (or border crossing card) before they can enter the country, but can enter through primary with the card. Someone from Canada does not need a visa, they just show up at the border, and are processed through primary. Anyone else has to go to secondary to do US Visit. Someone from a visa-waiver country can just show up, get waved to secondary, pay a fee, have prints taken, have photo taken, and be allowed to enter. Someone from Afghanistan must get a visa in advance and do all the US Visit procedures in secondary.  Someone tell me how that is not discrimination based on national origin. I would bet large sums of money that the person from Afghanistan who shows up at the border (even with a visa) gets a more thorough check than someone from Norway.

That is immigration, not customs, and is probably allowed under the strict-scrutiny test.  An example of what would be questionable would be to treat two arrivals from the same visa-waiver country differently because one is black and the other is white.

Maybe discrimination wasn't the right word. But they certainly have different procedures that are applied to different nationalities when you enter the country. This seems to be no more or less discrimination than California potentially having a different procedure for California residents vs. non-California residents, based on the license plate.

If you treat US citizens that drive cars registered in California differently from US citizens that drive cars registered in other states, that potentially leads to Fourteenth Amendment and full-faith-and-credit problems.  The agricultural inspectors may be relying on a rationale (cars foreign to California and the surrounding states being more likely to carry pests) that they think can survive strict scrutiny, but I don't know if that has actually been tested in the courts.

Per the California appellate court decision cited upthread, agricultural inspections are considered analogous to Border Patrol stops, for which the key Supreme Court precedent is US v. Martinez-Fuerte.  The rationale it gives for allowing such stops is an extension of Terry v. Ohio, which allows so-called "Terry stops," where a law enforcement officer who has reasonable suspicion (a lesser standard than probable cause) may detain someone briefly for questioning to see if he or she can establish probable cause.  Checkpoints are a special case since reasonable suspicion is not required.  The checkpoint operators must be non-discriminatory (e.g., stop all vehicles, or stop one in n vehicles), and cannot use evasion of the checkpoint as probable cause provided the evasion is done by legal means.  (The key case for checkpoints other than those operated by the Border Patrol is Michigan State Police v. Sitz.)

However, the California decision does not amount to a test of the legality of agricultural inspections themselves because it relates only to the narrow issue of whether there was probable cause to arrest a motorist when the agricultural inspectors found marijuana in his vehicle.

[bugo]

I'm sure that it works just like customs where they are allowed to discriminate. Customs certainly treats someone from Afghanistan differently than someone from Canada or the US.

I don't think they are, in fact, allowed to discriminate--you don't lose protected-class status when you pass through Customs.  Different treatment of arrivals by national origin would be allowed under US anti-discrimination legislation if there were a rational basis for it that meets the strict-scrutiny test.  Customs has been raked over the coals by the Government Accountability Office for subjecting US citizens disproportionately to invasive searches when they are black, female, or both.

Cops aren't allowed to pull cars over for no reason but if they want to they'll make up one.

[myosh_tino]

I didn't stop at the one on I-80 (I was heading east), but I did notice that they segregated traffic by license plate....California to one side, Out of State to the other.

Odd... maybe it's so that an inspector who's having a bad day only has to deal with people who know what's going on?

I'm sure that it works just like customs where they are allowed to discriminate. Customs certainly treats someone from Afghanistan differently than someone from Canada or the US. In this case, it is likely a matter of, "wow, he came all the way from NY, he might have picked up something on his long journey", whereas the majority of those with Cali plates on Sunday on I-15 are coming from Vegas.

The sign on I-80 was a permanent BGS. Probably not the result of one inspector having a bad day, but rather a concerted effort to apply different procedures and/or different levels of screening to visitors vs. returning Californians.

Not sure when you might have gone through the I-80/Truckee Ag inspection station... I've never seen cars split CA versus non-CA plates like this, and the permanent signs for this station simply divide up autos from trucks.

I seem to recall at the old Ag station just west of the CA-89 south exit, there was a special lane for Reno/Tahoe traffic. The new station doesn't have such a lane.

[bugo]

I'm sure that it works just like customs where they are allowed to discriminate. Customs certainly treats someone from Afghanistan differently than someone from Canada or the US.

I don't think they are, in fact, allowed to discriminate--you don't lose protected-class status when you pass through Customs.  Different treatment of arrivals by national origin would be allowed under US anti-discrimination legislation if there were a rational basis for it that meets the strict-scrutiny test.  Customs has been raked over the coals by the Government Accountability Office for subjecting US citizens disproportionately to invasive searches when they are black, female, or both.

Someone from Mexico has to be vetted and get a visa (or border crossing card) before they can enter the country

Or they can just walk across the border and the US government won't do anything about it!

[gonealookin]

The inspection stations are, at least in theory, being used to prevent the importation of empty bottles and cans from other states (for example, Nevada, which doesn't charge a deposit) into California for the purpose of collecting the CRV redemption value.  If the station agent looks at the back of your truck and sees bags full of empty bottles or cans you'll be required to fill out some paperwork.

There has always been a limit on the amount of recycling material someone with out-of-state plates could collect CRV for at a California recycling center.  For aluminum cans I think it used to be 50 pounds.  Now it's 25 pounds, and as I have Nevada plates I was specifically asked today at the South Lake Tahoe center, "where did you buy your (roughly 9 pounds of empty) cans?"  If I had said anything other than "California" my cans would have been rejected, even though they do all have the "CA CRV" imprint.

You'd think it would be a simple matter to transfer loads of Nevada cans and bottles to a vehicle with California plates before taking them to that South Lake Tahoe station, since the US 50 inspection station is out in Meyers and you don't have to pass through it to get from Nevada to South Lake Tahoe.  Nevertheless, South Tahoe Refuse has reportedly seen a large drop in their can and bottle redemptions since the updated regulations took effect.

[bugo]

They seriously enforce the coke can law?  California sounds less appealing the more I hear about it.

[J N Winkler]

They seriously enforce the coke can law?  California sounds less appealing the more I hear about it.

Petty coercion is one of the drawbacks to actually living in a blue state.  In California it is probably worse than it would be in, say, New York or Pennsylvania because anyone that moves out of state to escape the red tape will be replaced by more than one new arrival.

[ZLoth]

If it weren't for property taxes under Proposition 13, I would have moved out of California a long long time ago.

[Duke87]

Some Arizonans tend to call these check points California Border Patrol.

I've been known to call them that and I'm from the east coast. Google Maps even seems to agree. "Yermo Border Inspection Station".

As for my two experiences driving into California, both involved me simply being waved through without a word. One was on I-15, with Connecticut plates. The other was on I-8, in a rental with California plates.

The one time I drove out of California, on I-40, I noted a bit of a line head into the inspection station, but I was going the other way so I just sped on by.


I can see where the I-40 checkpoint would see more heavy use since that section of I-40 has a lot of truck traffic but relatively little car traffic. So, more trucks to check, and less of a traffic jam caused by doing so.