So true! Like the time at Jacksonville, the Silver Star was held for 6 or 7 hours based on a call from someone with overactive imagination on the train to 911 reporting suspicious activity because 6 Asian looking men were being moved from one car to another by a Hispanic CA to make room for a large group boarding at JAX. Go figure. And they called out the cavalry without bothering to ask the train crew if they were actually being hijacked to be run into the Amshack at Jacksonville.I have noticed that people, when traveling, seem to be uncomfortable around those that look "different" than them, whether its Color of Skin, Clothing, Language, Customs etc. Friends in the Govt. and LE tell me that there are many more "tips" and "reports" about Suspicious Persons involving these "different" people, but maybe this is just latent Racism, Ignorance or Paranoia brought about by Right Wing Politicians and Sensationalist Media!
. We got into Newark at 11pm.Well Bob, I'm not going to debate this with you further, but I highly suggest that you don't try that tactic as the Supreme Court has essentially decided that you are wrong. Yes, you're technically correct that you don't have to answer. But doing so gives them probably cause to detain you since they will have to verify by other means that you belong in this country. So unless you don't want to go where you wanted to go on your original schedule, I wouldn't recommend silence. If you don't like that please feel free to take it up with the Supreme Court; but I wouldn't hold my breath as they've already ruled against you.
As Alan tried to tell you, you can remain silent, but you can, and probably will be detained until such time as your nationality can ascertained. The Supreme Court has agreed to this and it is the constitutional law of the land until and if the Supreme Court decides to change it. I wouldn't hold my breath and would certainly not want to test it.
Neither will I. You are talking about two very different things here - the right to silence, and the fact that said silence may result in detention. I never argued against the second part of that, although there have been cases when BP agents onboard the LSL have simply moved on to other passengers if a previous passenger doesn't answer the officer's questions. The right to silence has not been decided against by the Supreme Court. Don't confuse the two.
Even at pro-bono y'all still couldn't afford my fee. :lol:
It's ok you confused reasonable suspicion and probable cause (which is common). An agent needs "reasonable suspicion" to stop you but "probable cause" to detain you and the 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination generally doesn't kick in until there's a "custodial interrogation."Neither will I. You are talking about two very different things here - the right to silence, and the fact that said silence may result in detention. I never argued against the second part of that, although there have been cases when BP agents onboard the LSL have simply moved on to other passengers if a previous passenger doesn't answer the officer's questions. The right to silence has not been decided against by the Supreme Court. Don't confuse the two.
A BP agent at a fixed checkpoint can stop a vehicle even without reasonable suspicion. A BP agent that's part of what's called a roving (mobile) checkpoint can't do that, however.It's ok you confused reasonable suspicion and probable cause (which is common). An agent needs "reasonable suspicion" to stop you but "probable cause" to detain you and the 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination generally doesn't kick in until there's a "custodial interrogation."
Specially in that case one would probably want to spin out a believable yarn as convincingly as possible rather than trying to assert right to silence :lol:
Not true and that is what you are probably confusing. ANYWHERE within 100 miles of the border, fixed or mobile they legally can and will stop you. See SCOTUS rulings.A BP agent at a fixed checkpoint can stop a vehicle even without reasonable suspicion. A BP agent that's part of what's called a roving (mobile) checkpoint can't do that, however.It's ok you confused reasonable suspicion and probable cause (which is common). An agent needs "reasonable suspicion" to stop you but "probable cause" to detain you and the 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination generally doesn't kick in until there's a "custodial interrogation."
Anyway, enough of this.
See the bottom of page 18/top of 19 here for an official report on the contrary.Not true and that is what you are probably confusing. ANYWHERE within 100 miles of the border, fixed or mobile they legally can and will stop you. See SCOTUS rulings.A BP agent at a fixed checkpoint can stop a vehicle even without reasonable suspicion. A BP agent that's part of what's called a roving (mobile) checkpoint can't do that, however.It's ok you confused reasonable suspicion and probable cause (which is common). An agent needs "reasonable suspicion" to stop you but "probable cause" to detain you and the 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination generally doesn't kick in until there's a "custodial interrogation."
Anyway, enough of this.
I think that Lee's claim is that they can stop you when fixed or mobile with reasonable suspicion, which is proved correct by this report. You are correct in saying that they can stop you without reasonable suspicion at a fixed checkpoint, but I don't see Lee making that claim anywhere.
Especially considering you never mentioned anything about checkpoints which wasn't the issue I was writing on. I was however, writing on the right to silence under the 5th Amendment and when it kicks in. Generally it does so upon what is known as a "custodial interrogation." (i.e., that point when you are not "free to leave.")A BP agent at a fixed checkpoint can stop a vehicle even without reasonable suspicion. A BP agent that's part of what's called a roving (mobile) checkpoint can't do that, however.It's ok you confused reasonable suspicion and probable cause (which is common). An agent needs "reasonable suspicion" to stop you but "probable cause" to detain you and the 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination generally doesn't kick in until there's a "custodial interrogation."
Anyway, enough of this.
I do 15 to 20 thousand miles on Amtrak and in the last 5 years I have been checked only twice personally (ignoring border crossing checks of course). Both times it consisted of asking me - oddly enough - where I was born, and then even more oddly, when I said India, they did not ask me anything further!!! I swear sometimes I cannot make any sense of what they do! I of course had my handy dandy US passport handy, but they didn't want to know what country I was a citizen of and whether I was here legally or illegally or just passing through or what. Outside that 5 year window once at Rochester they did the whole 9 yards of checking papers soviet style. That was closer to 9/11.
