Who is going to the USA, who has changed their travel and what will you do differently?

[elanshin]

and what's the evidence that bogus secondaries have happened or will happen



Im not sure what this is based on. I do think what has been happening is a lot of hyperbole is being injected into this.

As i said right now its conjecture, but it wouldn't be out of line with what the current administration is doing. Their sloppiness in deporting legal residents is enough to show that their policy has changed, it's inconsistently enforced and its sloppy as to what they flag. They also don't care that they are illegally deporting people either.

This can easily be extrapolated to inbound immigration as it falls under the same general immigration policy.

Whether that extends to boycotting US is a risk that each individual traveller will need to assess and judge for their own risk appetite, but i wouldn't throw away the situation as "show us the evidence". When you have the evidence, that might be too late for some people.

I personally don't believe that various official government updates to US travel advice constitute a boycott alone but at the same time does suggest even at official levels, there's some level of evidence - UK and Germany aren't updating their official travel advice for fun - and yes they subtly did update their travel advice with a caution.

But between this and general sentiments about what US is doing, people might decide it's not worth going and thats their decision.

 

[Quickstatus]

Their sloppiness in deporting legal residents

You mean the deported person who complained to the guardian?

They also don't care that they are illegally deporting people either.

I seem to remember Australia have done that over the years. While that does not in any way make it right , I suspect the hyperbole exceeds reality

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Another anecdote of an Aussie getting hassled at the border has emerged, per the Guardian:

When Jonathan returned from the US to Australia for a quick trip to scatter his sister’s ashes, he packed only two changes of clothes, leaving enough space in his small bag to carry the empty ashes urn to his home in the US. The trip was so brief he didn’t even pack a laptop charger.

The Australian says he was detained and deported when returning from the memorial in March, despite holding a working visa still valid for more than a year. He has been living on the US east coast for the better part of a decade – where his American partner, apartment, work studio and clients remain.

Again, as others have pointed out, we don't know the full situation with Johnathan. It may very well be the case that he didn't have his ducks in order (so to speak). What we are missing right now is hard data to say definitively if something has changed in terms of immigration policy. I would argue the key point here would be if we see a surge in the number of Australians requiring consular assistance whilst in the United States. Per the article:

Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade will release data detailing consular assistance to Australians in the US for the period covering the start of Trump’s second term in late 2025.

Perhaps this is something we should revisit when the data comes in?

 

[justinbrett]

...as you have repeated many times

IMO this whole thread is just repetitive hyperbole with little to no facts. A whole bunch of scaremongering based on a few media reports, despite almost all AFFers who have travelled to the US recently reporting they haven't noticed any changes. That's not to say the media reports are untrue, but they need to be taken in context of a country with 350 million people, there have always been stories like these but most have previously not made the media.

As for facts, the data from CBP for encounters is way down year on year since the change of president (I have filtered for Other citizenship to include Australians, but the overall stats are down also):



As for phone searches, the Australian and UK governments have had this power for years. Again this is just a case of it being the media's flavour of the month. The facts show there has been no material increase since the change of President.

 

[DC3]

As from May 7th this year all passengers flying domestically in US will have to supply "REAL-ID".

. Sorry, but someone wake me when this actually starts.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

IMO this whole thread is just repetitive hyperbole with little to no facts. A whole bunch of scaremongering based on a few media reports, despite almost all AFFers who have travelled to the US recently reporting they haven't noticed any changes. That's not to say the media reports are untrue, but they need to be taken in context of a country with 350 million people, there have always been stories like these but most have previously not made the media.

As for facts, the data from CBP for encounters is way down year on year since the change of president (I have filtered for Other citizenship to include Australians, but the overall stats are down also)

In fairness, we still don't have enough data to say conclusively either way. Yes the dashboard you shared seems to suggest that maybe there are fewer issues with CBP, but remember President Trump was sworn in on January 20th. If we are being generous, I would argue that any directives from the President to the CBP in terms of how to conduct themselves probably took a couple of weeks to formalize and communicate throughout the bureaucracy. Also realize data collection tends to be backwards looking, meaning an action taken today may only show up in reports several months down the track. Hence, as I've stated before, I don't think we'll be able to comment either until late this year when enough data has been collected not just from the CBP, but also from other sources like other nation's governments. Certainly if we see an uptick in consular assistance from a number of nations for their citizens when in the US it would be cause for concern. But again, we won't know for some time.

-RooFlyer88

 

[DC3]

IMO this whole thread is just repetitive hyperbole with little to no facts …

Yes, but it’s something that we AFFers can do so well.

 

[Himeno]

You mean the deported person who complained to the guardian?

Like the many people who have been deported when there are court orders telling the gov not to.

 

[stm1sydney]

Like the many people who have been deported when there are court orders telling the gov not to.

They are violent criminals who are illegally in the country. Sounds fine to me.

 

[p--and--t]

They are violent criminals who are illegally in the country. Sounds fine to me.

Supporting evidence?

 

[Forg]

They are violent criminals who are illegally in the country. Sounds fine to me.

While there’s a lot of conjecture elsewhere in this thread, stories by deported people saying they weren’t doing anything wrong & you can’t know what really happened & what they really said to the immigration officials etc etc … the comment I quoth here is incorrect. Non-violent non-criminals with valid visas or permanent residency have been gathered-up and illegally sent to prisons in foreign countries from the US, the “violent criminals” thing is a proven absolute lie by the current fascist regime.

 

[clifford]

What I'm getting from all of this (not that I needed to) is that it's similar to religion and politics. It seems to me there are those who will never change their minds, come what may, so really the whole discussion is rather pointless IMO.

Might be titillating for some though..

 

[p--and--t]

A direct quote from Home 1

"This case isn’t isolated. At New York JFK alone, 194 arriving foreigners were deemed “inadmissible” in March, up from 135 in February"

And Denied, deported, detained: U.S. border incidents have travelers thinking twice

"Potential U.S. visitors are increasingly uncertain about traveling to America, after a number of high-profile detentions in the Trump administration’s crackdown on immigration."

And Supreme Court rules Trump officials must 'facilitate' release of man deported to El Salvador - BBC News

"The US Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that the Trump administration must try to release a Maryland man who was mistakenly deported to a mega-jail in El Salvador."

And Australian Passenger Deported from New York Over Hong Kong Stopover

"This deportation isn’t an isolated event. Data shows a spike in “inadmissible” rulings at JFK—194 cases in March 2025, up from 135 in February.

Analysts link this trend to tougher border policies rolled out in early 2025. These rules aim to boost security but have sparked debate about their impact on tourism.

Some warn that the U.S. could see fewer visitors, much like the drop after 9/11, as travelers face unexpected hurdles."

But none of these are FOX news reports so have to be discounted as just media noise by some.

 

[justinbrett]

A direct quote from Home 1

"This case isn’t isolated. At New York JFK alone, 194 arriving foreigners were deemed “inadmissible” in March, up from 135 in February"

And Denied, deported, detained: U.S. border incidents have travelers thinking twice

"Potential U.S. visitors are increasingly uncertain about traveling to America, after a number of high-profile detentions in the Trump administration’s crackdown on immigration."

And Supreme Court rules Trump officials must 'facilitate' release of man deported to El Salvador - BBC News

"The US Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that the Trump administration must try to release a Maryland man who was mistakenly deported to a mega-jail in El Salvador."

And Australian Passenger Deported from New York Over Hong Kong Stopover

"This deportation isn’t an isolated event. Data shows a spike in “inadmissible” rulings at JFK—194 cases in March 2025, up from 135 in February.

Analysts link this trend to tougher border policies rolled out in early 2025. These rules aim to boost security but have sparked debate about their impact on tourism.

Some warn that the U.S. could see fewer visitors, much like the drop after 9/11, as travelers face unexpected hurdles."

But none of these are FOX news reports so have to be discounted as just media noise by some.

OK, an increase from Feb 25. But what's the increase from 2024?

I can't get airport specific stats from the CBP website, but for New York as a whole it was 514 for Feb (it doesn't yet have March loaded). So 194/135 proportionally would be the same as about 750/514 for the NY office, which is a slight increase on Dec/Jan but still a significant decrease from most other months.

This is the problem, cherry picking reporting to make assumptions when the official stats haven't even caught up. Time will tell but every objective source I've seen so far doesn't support the scaremongering.

 

[Maca44]

I am booked from Frankfurt direct to Vancouver in July 2025, and will be in BC for about 4-5 weeks. I have a car in Vancouver, and will (hopefully) drive into Washington State for a week or so to see friends. I have been to Canada and USA many, many times and have everything arranged, however, if things change and I am knocked back at the boarder crossing, then so be it. I see it as a 'day to day' thing, and their policies can change at any time. I am 75 this year, my last harrar and just seeing friends so it's not the end of the world for me.

 

[elanshin]

Airbus doesn't have capacity to increase production but back in February the CEO was quoted saying if the tariff situation escaltes they may pause US airline deliveries and bump other airlines up.

Looks like Delta's CEO is saying "No we are not paying tariffs". As to how that remains to be seen - whether they can negotiate a deal or if they will delay deliveries instead.

 

[Human]

Looks like Delta's CEO is saying "No we are not paying tariffs". As to how that remains to be seen - whether they can negotiate a deal or if they will delay deliveries instead.

Maybe I’m missing something but if Delta is forced to abandon orders from foreign aeroplane manufacturers (Airbus etc) and instead place more tariff-free orders from the local manufacturer (Boeing), wouldn’t the current Administration in the USA see that as a win? Doesn’t that sum up the rationale for tariffs in the first place?

It’ll be interesting to see who blinks first on this one…

 

[elanshin]

Maybe I’m missing something but if Delta is forced to abandon orders from foreign aeroplane manufacturers (Airbus etc) and instead place more tariff-free orders from the local manufacturer (Boeing), wouldn’t the current Administration in the USA see that as a win? Doesn’t that sum up the rationale for tariffs in the first place?

It’ll be interesting to see who blinks first on this one…

Delta has only 737M10s on order with Boeing (the type that isn't even certified and only Boeing order they placed for a long timr now). They're not going to be getting planes from Boeing anytime soon. They have transitioned into a majority Airbus fleet strategy with all Airbus widebodies so I don't see them changing that anytime soon.

Their CEO is basically saying we're going to either wait out all these tariffs or we're going to try to negotiate exemptions is how i read it.

 

[p--and--t]

Maybe I’m missing something but if Delta is forced to abandon orders from foreign aeroplane manufacturers (Airbus etc) and instead place more tariff-free orders from the local manufacturer (Boeing), wouldn’t the current Administration in the USA see that as a win? Doesn’t that sum up the rationale for tariffs in the first place?

It’ll be interesting to see who blinks first on this one…

I could be wrong but doesn't Boeing source a significant % of its parts from other countries (including Australia and China) and assembles in the US. On that basis its finished products will also be more expensive due to tariffs on its components.

The quantum of change may however still be smaller than on a European built aircraft depending on the tariff regime in each country.

 

[Human]

Their CEO is basically saying we're going to either wait out all these tariffs or we're going to try to negotiate exemptions is how i read it.

That’s how I read it, too. And maybe there’s some encouragement from recent developments such as many forms of tech being exempted (which will hugely benefit Apple, among others).

However, the rationale for exempting iPhones etc from tariffs is that there’s no smartphone manufacturing industry in the USA to speak of and it would take years to ramp it up.

I can’t imagine the Delta CEO being given much sympathy if he were to argue that they should be granted an exemption because “we have a majority Airbus fleet strategy”! But who knows?