Montreal Border Crossing

[J N Winkler]

how the fuck is that legal?  the aggies should be strictly looking for agricultural goods.

Simple:  the agricultural inspection takes place in public.  If anyone can see that the van is riding low . . .

if an aggie spots an illegal alien snorting coke off a hooker's ass in the back of my pervert van filled with human slaves who are knifing each other for the glory of Satan... I don't think they should have any right to do anything but look me in the eye and say "no vegetables?  carry on, sir."

I think that is how the agricultural inspectors usually handle things in their official capacity.  I don't know, however, if they are allowed to act as complainants in a personal capacity using information that comes to them solely through their official duties.  ("911, what's your emergency?"  "I'm an agricultural inspector at Needles.  Just now, a man claiming to be a sign vendor from San Diego went through, in a van with license plate number XXXXXXX.  There seemed to be prostitution and illegal use of Schedule A drugs going on in the back.")  I also don't know if the California agricultural inspectors have an information-sharing arrangement with the Border Patrol.  I would guess not, because that would raise all kinds of difficult constitutional questions, but I couldn't guarantee that they don't.

[agentsteel53]

Simple:  the agricultural inspection takes place in public.  If anyone can see that the van is riding low . . .

"riding low" is probable cause now?

I got pulled over for that on I-8 a few months ago; so I grumbled and thought to myself "we're within 100 miles of the border, so anything goes". 

I hope they enjoyed looking at camping equipment.

[J N Winkler]

"riding low" is probable cause now?

Probable cause--I'm pretty sure not.  Reasonable suspicion--I am pretty sure it is.  They only need reasonable suspicion to stop you.

[agentsteel53]

in general, though, doesn't "placing a border patrol vehicle more than 100 miles from the border" count as some sort of "expecting to do unconstitutional things" and therefore unconstitutional already?

what is preventing, then, the border patrol from roving around the entire US, pulling over anyone who meets whatever standard is considered "reasonable suspicion" these days?  taillight out, etc.

"but officer, my taillight wasn't out."
*smash* "yeah it was."

[cpzilliacus]

in general, though, doesn't "placing a border patrol vehicle more than 100 miles from the border" count as some sort of "expecting to do unconstitutional things" and therefore unconstitutional already?

what is preventing, then, the border patrol from roving around the entire US, pulling over anyone who meets whatever standard is considered "reasonable suspicion" these days?  taillight out, etc.

"but officer, my taillight wasn't out."
*smash* "yeah it was."

Between 2001 and 2008, I saw the U.S. Border Patrol working at the old Washington, D.C. Greyhound/Peter Pan terminal, on First Street, N.E. apparently looking for undocumented persons (and arresting some) as they got off the bus.

[J N Winkler]

in general, though, doesn't "placing a border patrol vehicle more than 100 miles from the border" count as some sort of "expecting to do unconstitutional things" and therefore unconstitutional already?

Not if they act on reasonable suspicion only outside the context of suspicionless checkpoints, which are allowed only within 100 miles of the border.  Aside from the resource implications (see below), another issue is the possibility of jurisdictional conflict with other federal agencies responsible for enforcing immigration laws.

what is preventing, then, the border patrol from roving around the entire US, pulling over anyone who meets whatever standard is considered "reasonable suspicion" these days?  taillight out, etc.

Productivity:  since they don't have a general policing function, they need to operate in areas and on routes that have a high concentration of illegal border-crossers.  That is generally close to the border, and I suspect I-40 at Needles is a special case since, despite its distance from the border, it is favored by people smugglers to the degree necessary to justify the considerable resource cost of having Border Patrol officers surveil the agricultural inspection checkpoint.

I certainly wouldn't expect to see the Border Patrol operating on, say, US 54 in Kansas, notwithstanding the handful of recorded incidents where trucks of various descriptions have gotten into serious, multi-fatality accidents and are later found (by the Highway Patrol) to have been carrying undocumented aliens.

[Scott5114]

It should be noted that there are laws in some states requiring consent of all parties present to be recorded (this is why many companies state "your call may be recorded for quality control purposes"–if you stay on the line, that comprises consent). Recording the customs agents adjoining a state with such a law may well be illegal on those grounds.

how the fuck is that legal?  the aggies should be
if an aggie spots an illegal alien snorting coke off a hooker's ass in the back of my pervert van filled with human slaves who are knifing each other for the glory of Satan... I don't think they should have any right to do anything but look me in the eye and say "no vegetables?  carry on, sir."

"911, what's your emergency?"  "I'm an agricultural inspector at Needles.  Just now, a man claiming to be a sign vendor from San Diego went through, in a van with license plate number XXXXXXX.  There seemed to be prostitution and illegal use of Schedule A drugs going on in the back."

"The knifing for the glory of Satan, however, is protected by the 1st Amendment."

[agentsteel53]

Between 2001 and 2008, I saw the U.S. Border Patrol working at the old Washington, D.C. Greyhound/Peter Pan terminal, on First Street, N.E. apparently looking for undocumented persons (and arresting some) as they got off the bus.

I believe DC is within 100 miles of a port, which is also part of the ruled exemption.

Needles, on the other hand, is maybe within 100 miles of East Ass and not much else.  (I checked - Vegas is 110 miles away.)

[agentsteel53]

Not if they act on reasonable suspicion only outside the context of suspicionless checkpoints, which are allowed only within 100 miles of the border.  Aside from the resource implications (see below), another issue is the possibility of jurisdictional conflict with other federal agencies responsible for enforcing immigration laws.

while what you are saying is logically correct, it still feels wrong, in an even greater sense than "within 100 miles is a free-for-all".  at least they got the Supreme Court to sign off on the 100 mile thing; here, they're just operating on a technicality.

also, fuck the aggies for being complicit with this.  I suppose there is honor among low-level freedom-restricting functionaries. 

Productivity:  since they don't have a general policing function, they need to operate in areas and on routes that have a high concentration of illegal border-crossers.  That is generally close to the border, and I suspect I-40 at Needles is a special case since, despite its distance from the border, it is favored by people smugglers to the degree necessary to justify the considerable resource cost of having Border Patrol officers surveil the agricultural inspection checkpoint.

also, I don't think the resource cost is all that high.  the aggies are doing most of the work for them.  "hey buddy, got one coming your way.  smells of raw meat and Mexicans.  have fun, old boy!"

[Brandon]

^^ Given that the agricultural checkpoints started life as Okie checkpoints, I'm not too surprised.

[Zmapper]

For what its worth, I heard a second-hand observation of a USBP SUV parked in a movie theater parking lot in Ft. Collins. My first guess would be they are relocating vehicles from the Mexican to the Canadian border or vise-versa, but the movie theater isn't very close to the most likely thoroughfare (I-25). Besides, why would their vehicle be parked in a movie theater parking lot hundreds of miles from any border in the first place?

[cpzilliacus]

I believe DC is within 100 miles of a port, which is also part of the ruled exemption.

Do you mean airport?  Anyone arriving by air from outside the U.S. is already having to pass through U.S. Immigration and Customs.

Or seaport?  Aside from cruise ships (some of which call at ports in Baltimore and along the Delaware River), I don't think there is much person transport by sea within 100 miles of the District of Columbia.

[agentsteel53]

I alas do not remember the details, but I think the rationale is to have a secondary net to catch illegal boat landings. 

[vdeane]

The coasts count as the border for the context of the constitution free zone.

[Duke87]

On both of my encounters with the Californian Customs Agents I have simply been waved through without a word, which makes entering California the most pleasant border crossing experience I have ever had.

I'd still put that behind every other border where they, you know, don't do anything at all?

the most pleasant border crossing I experience is ... oh, say Arizona to Utah on US-89A.  just as an example.

My comment was a dig at the stereotype that California acts like it's its own country. Your example is different because no such stereotype exists of Arizona or Utah, and thus you can't joke that crossing that state line is crossing an international border.

[NE2]

Texas.

[corco]

Utah

Definitely has a reputation as being its own country- you realize Utah wanted to secede for a long time- that's part of why they ended up giving a big chunk of Utah Territory's original borders to Nevada (http://www.tahoenuggets.com/Websites/tahoenuggets/images/Nugget__239_Disputed_Border_Map.jpg) and why it became a state way later than all the surrounding states but Arizona

[J N Winkler]

State of Deseret, anyone?

[corco]

Yeah, Utah's pre-statehood history is pretty fascinating (here's a decent primer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_War) and not really talked about but the US government basically forcefully occupied Utah for several years before the Civil War forced them to divert resources. I'd say it's one of the states with the greatest claims to "is its own country"- even today it's culturally very different from the rest of the US (at least as far as places populated mostly by white people go). When you're in Utah (especially along the Wasatch Front), you know you're in Utah!

[oscar]

State of Deseret, anyone?

I recall seeing at a bookstore in Salt Lake City a book about the "Deseret Republic" dreams of some of the Mormon settlers.  The boundaries didn't even include all of present-day Utah, but they did reach southwestward all the way to San Diego.

Of course, for that "whole other country" feeling, Utah has nothing on Hawaii, which has a substantial independence movement, its own second official language, reminders of its not-so-distant past as an independent monarchy (including Interstate H-1, named for two of the last reigning monarchs, Queen Lilioukalani and King Lunalilo), as well as serious agricultural inspections (most intrusively regulating importation of dogs, cats, and other critters, to keep the islands rabies- and snake-free). 

[agentsteel53]

I wonder what the opposite of this is: which country feels least like its own independent country, but instead an extension of a neighboring one.  offhand I would say Luxembourg, but I have barely been there (just once to clinch it, buy cheap gas, and return to Germany).  it felt like an extension of either Germany or Belgium.

[Brandon]

Texas.

Since when did Texas stop people at its borders and inquire about agricultural goods or try to keep Okies out?  That's all California.  Texas, as much as it was its own country, and still feels a bit like it to some extent, gasp, actually follows the MUTCD of all things.

[Alps]

I wonder what the opposite of this is: which country feels least like its own independent country, but instead an extension of a neighboring one.  offhand I would say Luxembourg, but I have barely been there (just once to clinch it, buy cheap gas, and return to Germany).  it felt like an extension of either Germany or Belgium.

How about the Vatican City? It's just something you see as a Roman tourist.

[corco]

I wonder what the opposite of this is: which country feels least like its own independent country, but instead an extension of a neighboring one.  offhand I would say Luxembourg, but I have barely been there (just once to clinch it, buy cheap gas, and return to Germany).  it felt like an extension of either Germany or Belgium.

Make Canada non-metric again and most of it is pretty close to just feeling like the USA

[Duke87]

I wonder what the opposite of this is: which country feels least like its own independent country, but instead an extension of a neighboring one.  offhand I would say Luxembourg, but I have barely been there (just once to clinch it, buy cheap gas, and return to Germany).  it felt like an extension of either Germany or Belgium.

Make Canada non-metric again and most of it is pretty close to just feeling like the USA

How do you tell a Canadian apart from an American? Tell them there's no difference and see how they react.