THINKING OF VISITING THE CNMI? THINK AGAIN IF YOU ARE A FOREIGN FEMALE TOURIST!

December 3, 2013

As I predicted months ago, a lawsuit has been filed in the U.S. District Court of the Northern Marianas Islands against eight U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agents by an innocent female Chinese tourist. The woman alleges she was unlawfully detained, searched, threatened, harassed, interrogated, handcuffed, assaulted and denied entry to the U.S. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) "solely on the basis of her race, ethnicity, national origin and gender in violation of the equal protection component of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution."

The complaint states that the "CBP policy or practice specifically targets and/or disproportionately effects Chinese females of child-bearing age and is not applied or enforced against other males or females of other ethnicities or nationalities."

For months U.S. Delegate Gregoiro (Kilili) Sablan and CNMI Governor Eloy Inos have protested the fact that Chinese tourists use the CNMI as a destination to give birth so that their babies will be U.S. citizens. The CNMI birth tourist industry has been documented on this site (see links to previous posts below) and by international news outlets for years.

Recently, USA Today covered CNMI's birth tourism issues. From the article:
Eloy Inos, the islands' governor, told the Saipan Tribune that immigration agents had sent home about 20 "birth tourists" in the past three to four months because of "documentation problems." 
And last month, a pregnant tourist who had arrived on a charter flight from Shanghai late one evening was sent back home early the next morning. Fenny He, the leader of the tour involved, told the Tribune she advised the woman not to go but "she refused to listen."
The article continues to reveal information about the tour companies and others who profit from the industry:
The operator of one Saipan guesthouse told Radio Free Asia that she hosted 50 Chinese mothers last year, charging them $11,000 for accommodations, travel, translation help and some medical care, though most also incurred around $10,000 in other medical bills. 
Most of those flights are organized by Century Tours, a company owned by Hong Kong's Tan family, who previously pioneered the islands' garment business and own several Saipan hotels. 
Inos and the islands' non-voting congressman in Washington have appealed to the Department of Homeland Security to deny entry to birth tourists. In response, U.S. immigration has been passing the word directly Chinese travel companies to discourage maternity traffic.
Some serious questions have been raised. Should U.S. immigration be involved in telling Chinese travel companies that female tourists should not to go to the U.S. if they are pregnant? What authority does this agency have in deciding to block entry to the U.S. on the basis of pregnancy?  Isn't the DHS violating the U.S. Constitution by passing the word to Chinese travel companies to discourage maternity traffic? Are U.S. citizens denied entry to foreign countries if they are pregnant? Are U.S. citizen women denied entry to the CNMI if they are pregnant? It sure seems that the U.S. and CNMI Governments are targeting Chinese women in a discriminatory and illegal manner.

Other articles, such as one in  Islands Business, state that birth tourism to the CNMI is on the upswing since Chinese and Russian visas waivers were initiated to attract tourists.

A November 12, 2013 news release on Delegate Sablan's website also
directly discusses how the governor and delegate are working with "Asiana Airlines, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and the Chinese government to further minimize—if not totally eliminate—the so-called “birth tourism” here."

The press release noted that the CNMI wants Chinese tourists and wants to maintain the Chinese visa waiver system.

But can the CNMI Government have it both ways? Can they have an aggressive and dangerous campaign to block foreign pregnant tourists from visiting the CNMI and roll out the welcome mat for others? That is extremely unlikely.

The CNMI Government has clearly launched an all-out attack on pregnant Chinese female tourists of child bearing age with the apparent blessing and help of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

A September 2013 Saipan Tribune article stated that in recent months twenty pregnant Chinese tourists were denied entry to the CNMI because they had "documentation problems." Really? Is the Chinese visa waiver program not working? How do foreigners board planes if they do not have the correct documentation or papers?  Are pregnant Chinese tourists or Chinese tourists who are suspected that they might be pregnant the only ones with "documentation problems"? How many other tourists have had documentation problems –male tourists, elderly tourist, child tourists, tourists from other foreign countries? What specifically were these so-called problems that seem to be isolated to Chinese female tourists?

It is understandable that the CNMI Government does not want to carry the costs of foreign women who give birth in the Commonwealth Health Center (CHC) and then fail to pay their bills. But how many Chinese tourists actually gave birth at the CHC and then failed to pay their bills? Are foreigners the only ones who do not pay their bills at the CHC? How many CNMI residents gave birth at the CHC and then failed to pay their bills? Articles about the CNMI birth tourism reveal that their agents charge the pregnant women tens of thousands to cover hospital expenses. Is this even a real problem?

There are no pregnancy-related questions on the U.S. Guam-CNMI Visa Waiver application.  There is no warning to Chinese tourists that they could be detained and/or deported if they are females of child bearing age and suspected of being pregnant. It is in no way acceptable for the CNMI or U.S. Governments to screen foreign tourists who arrive on U.S. soil to determine if they are pregnant and then refuse entry to them or force them to return to China, if they are pregnant or are suspected of being pregnant.

Welcome to America (NOT!)
In October 2013 Yu Min Zhao, a 32-year-old school teacher travelled from China to Saipan for a one-week vacation with her husband. The complaint alleges that U.S. CBP agents harassed her repeatedly, accusing her of being pregnant. She was denied entry to the CNMI even though her husband was allowed to enter.

She was  locked up in a detention room for 22 hours and was denied access to her husband and an attorney. During her confinement she was verbally abused and assaulted by U.S. CBP agents. According to the complaint,  U.S. CBP agent Dennis Jacobs and another unknown agent told her she "had no rights".

The U.S. constantly attacks China for human rights offenses and then a U.S. agent tells an innocent Chinese woman that she has no rights? Seriously?

Agents continually threatened the woman in an attempt to coerce her to sign a voluntary release form to allow her to return to China despite the fact that she had a valid visa and was allowed to board the plane in China.

Even more horrific is the fact that the U.S. CPB agents subjected her to numerous body searches. After the plaintiff screamed for help agents removed her clothing and took her possessions.

The complaint states:
1. This is a civil rights action brought to redress blatant and rampant racial and gender discrimination perpetrated against a 32 year old Chinese school teacher (plaintiff YU MIN ZHAO) by U.S. Customs and Border Protection Officer ("CBP") Dennis Jacobs and seven other as yet unidentified CBP officers (collectively the "CBP defendants") during an immigration inspection at the Saipan International Airport. 
2. The CBP defendants violated plaintiff YU MIN ZHAO's constitutional right of equal protection under the law as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and made applicable to the federal government by the Due Process component of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as well as plaintiff's constitutional right of being free from the use of excessive force under the Fourth Amendment by: 
(A) Engaging in unlawful racial and gender profiling by accusing plaintiff YU MIN ZHAO of being pregnant simply because she was Chinese and a female of child bearing age; 
(B) Subjecting plaintiff YU MIN ZHAO to special scrutiny, harassment, verbal abuse and physical abuse because defendants believed her to be pregnant merely because she was Chinese and a female of child-bearing age; 
(C) Placing plaintiff in solitary detention for 22 hours without providing her any food and limiting her to one cup of water during that time as well as disallowing her any communication to the outside world including her own husband who was anxiously waiting for her outside the Saipan International Airport without knowing why she was being detained or what was going on merely because plaintiff was Chinese and a female of child-bearing age; 
(D) Physically harassing, intimidating and abusing the plaintiff by using unnecessary force and overwhelming numbers in deploying 7-8 CBP officers to "gang" hand-cuff plaintiffs hands behind her back while she was in detention despite the fact plaintiff is 5'2 and 120 pounds and did not otherwise post a threat to the security of any CBP officer or resist; 
(E) Subjecting plaintiff to arbitrary and repeated body searches during her 22-hour detention as retaliation for her numerous refusals to voluntarily agree to return to China on the next available flight; 
(F) Subjecting plaintiff to psychological intimidation by removing her shoes, necklace, watch and other articles of clothing or personal items from her body as retaliation for her terrified screams for help during her 22 hour detention; 
(G) Repeatedly denying plaintiff the right to counsel despite the fact she was being held in custody, subject to extended interrogation and placed in handcuffs; 
(H) Coercing plaintiff into signing forms that were in English and never translated or explained to her by an interpreter; and 
(I) Un-lawfully denying plaintiff admission to the Saipan under the Guam-CNMI Visa Waiver Program on account of her race and gender: namely the fact she was Chinese and suspected of being pregnant.
As a U.S. citizen I am disgusted and ashamed that a tourist to our country was violated in this most inhumane and sick way by U.S. officials.

If this woman actually was pregnant then not just her, but also her child would have been in grave danger from the assault. The complaint further alleges these disgusting human, civil and constitution rights violations:
43. Defendant CBP Officer JOHN DOE #2 then tried to trick and/or coerce plaintiff into signing an English language document that stated she "voluntarily consented" to returning to China by refusing to explain what the document meant or providing a Chinese translation of the same. 
44. Instead, defendant CBP Officer JOHN DOE #2 warned her that she would have a permanent record that would prevent her from returning to the U.S. ever again if she did not sign. 
45. Defendant CBP Officer JOHN DOE #2 also threatened to have plaintiff's husband Jian Li arrested and deported if she continued to refuse to sign even though her husband had already been granted admission by CBP for ten days. 
46. Additionally, defendant CBP Officer JOHN DOE #2 told plaintiff that her refusal to sign the "voluntary'' consent form was futile anyway because she would be forced to leave either way. 
47. Plaintiff YU MIN ZHAO refused to sign the form because she did not know what it said and otherwise could not understand why she was not being allowed entry to Saipan even though her husband travelling with her with exactly the same immigration background and visa history had been granted entry. 
48. In an effort to break plaintiffs will, defendants CBP Officers JOHN DOES 1-5 and JANE DOES 1-2 subjected plaintiff to numerous unnecessary body searches throughout her twentytwo hour detention as a form of harassment and intimidation. 
49. Out of frustration at her helplessness, plaintiff YU MIN ZHAO began resorting to screaming for help whenever the door to her detention room was opened as she was bewildered,  terrified and overwhelmed by what was happening. 
50. In retaliation for her screams, defendants CBP Officers JOHN DOES 1-5 and JANE DOES 1-2 came into plaintiff YU MIN ZHAO's detention room and removed articles of clothing from her body as well as personal items as punishment for her perceived "lack of co-operation". 
51. At one point, defendants CBP Officers JOHN DOES 1-5 and JANE DOES 1-2 gang tackled plaintiff in her cell and forcibly handcuffed her hands behind her back by shoving her face first against a wall and violently twisting her hands behind her back merely because she refused to get fingerprinted as a form of protest of the abuse she was suffering. 
52. Specifically, three CBP Officers stormed into plaintiff's detention cell and rushed at plaintiff while she stood in a passive position with her back near the wall. One CBP Officer spun plaintiff around, kicked apart her legs and slammed plaintiffs face against the wall causing her pain from both the force of the impact and the friction of the wall to her face. A second CBP Officer then pushed plaintiff's shoulders forward so that her face remained press to the wall while another CBP Officer painfully twisted plaintiffs hands behind her back and applied handcuffs. 
53. While this was happening, another 3 to 4 CBP Officer stood inside the doorway of plaintiffs detention cell watching in an unnecessary show of force and intimidation. 
54. Plaintiff YU MIN ZHAO was then left alone crying in her cell for about an hour with her hands painfully handcuffed behind her back without being given any medical attention or explanation as to why this was happening to her. 
55. Eventually, plaintiff YU MIN ZHAO signed the English language document 24 presented to her even though it was never explained or translated into Chinese after approximately 25 twenty-two hours of isolation, harassment, intimidation, threats and abuse. 
56. At that juncture, plaintiffs spirit and will had been broken by the fact she had gone more than a day without sleep or food. 
57. To date, Plaintiff YU MIN ZHAO still does not know what form she signed said as it was never translated to her in Chinese and she was never given a copy therein. 
The CNMI wants to maintain a Chinese visa waiver program, but it has a policy that violates the rights of any woman who is suspected of being pregnant. This makes no sense! Is there any other U.S. airport where this kind of disgusting near-torturous policy is enforced?

Every foreign woman considering traveling to the CNMI, needs to be warned of the abusive, inhumane and unconstitutional treatment that is inflicted upon innocent women of child bearing years by U.S. customs officials.  I hope that Yu Min Zhao and other victims of this horrific policy are contacting government officials and the press so that potential tourists are warned.

If the facts are found to be true (and there is no reason to suspect that they are not) then every CNMI and U.S. agent and official that was involved should be terminated. The officials involved in this incident should be suspended immediately until a thorough investigation is conducted.

The complaint is beyond horrific.  This policy and the practice of intimidating, assaulting, detaining, humiliating, handcuffing, and verbally abusing female tourists could severely strain relations between the United States and China. This case alone could create an international scandal, especially since the incident clearly involves human rights abuses against an innocent Chinese national by U.S. Government officials. This incident could shut down the Guam-CNMI Chinese visa waiver program.

What do Governor Inos and Delegate Sablan have to say about this lawsuit?

Read the lawsuit:


Posts on baby tourism:
Immigration Updates
Made in the USA: Saipan's Backdoor to United States
Fitial Peddles His Xenophobic BS in Washington DC
Is Governor Fitial Joking?
CNMI-Korean Connections

36 comments:

Anonymous said...

US Immigration, at your service.

The CNMI has no choice but to take a strong position on the matter. The feds have already said that if this continues, there's a chance the waivers will be lost.

This would be disastrous to the CNMI recovery.

Anonymous said...

Disastrous is U.S. officials violating the rights of innocent tourists

Anonymous said...

boy innocent till proven guilty is what i thought you preach.....boy is that wrong. no reason to believe that what the lawyer claims isnt true you say??? Ha finding an honest lawyer on Saipan is easy cause there are so many of them right? you have room to list them all?? put woodruff and many others at the top of that list. many of us will wait for facts and not allegations from a lawyer who has a personal professional or monetary stake in this case to come out. when they do will you be as vocal if they prove otherwise......somehow i dont think the reproach to the attorney and this 'victim' wont be the same. i am sure it will still be a conspiracy by the feds......

Wendy Doromal said...

No I have no reason to believe an attorney would falsify a lawsuit with such details -no reason. In fact, I would not be at all surprised if more people came forward. I hope that this airport has cameras in all detention and interrogations rooms. If it does not, it should.

Anonymous said...

You know better Wendy. This story is her word against US border patrol. A helpless pregnant Chinese tourist who was gang handcuffed, stripped, beaten, violated, abused, neglected, kidnapped....oh the list goes on and on. No video? Won't matter this was all done by the evil border patrol behind closed doors because that's what they do. Her lawyer sees his client holding back tears on the witness stand and the Federal government settling out of court. Times are touch for lawyers here and this might pay some money.
The US is trying to curb pregnant Chinese women from entering the CNMI (and the US) because they are flying here to give birth to a US Citizen and nothing more.

Anonymous said...

Why attack the pregnant women? Why not close down the businesses catering for birth tourism? These businesses are the only one making enormous profits,I doubt if they pay taxes for such services. Clearly, it's a scam operating under some sort of other type of business. Not to mention the expenses these pregnant women bring to CHC. Not to mention how arrogant these Chinese pregnant women at the hospital claiming they have to be treated like VIPs because they're tourists bearing a US cit baby and that slapping back CHC with big hospital bills that they don't want to pay, saying US in debt with China, A Chinese women said hell she should pay! May be high time for the authorities to verify how much the govt, particularly CHC loss in this scam.

Close these businesses that cater to pregnant tourists!

Anonymous said...

I know the Federal Bureau of Investigation along with USCIS are actively investigating the MD who provides the birthing services for Chinese and Korean nationals. I believe it's $15,000.00 per birth and US birth certificate signature. This is unethical, immoral and hopefully illegal.

Anonymous said...

CNMI Governor Mr. Eloy Inos once stated, “He has no problem with the birth tourism in CNMI if Chinese pregnant women are willing to pay $50000 for a birth certificate of her kid”. It indicates that he does not oppose “Birth Tourism in CNMI”. But he is asking DHS at the same time to catch these Chinese pregnant women only at the CNMI port of entry and deport them back home. Policies are just twisted. U.S.I.C.E and U.S.C.B.P are sued now. What is next? Just wait and see what U.S.D.H.S does for “CNMI Chinese Visa waiver program” as this news is getting into international media?

Anonymous said...

I want to know why 20 pregnant women were sent back to China. Your questions are valid. How did they get on the plane in Bejing if they had no visa? What documentation was not valid when they reached Saipan? Yes, it seems only pregnant Chinese tourists were sent back. Did they get a refund for money they spent on the airfare and vacation?

This policy and publicity surrounding this case will kill tourism. NEW SAIPAN AD CAMPAIGN: "Come to Saipan. Extra special bonus for women. You get two or more free body searches, slammed around, mocked, and locked up. You pay to see the inside of the Saipan Airport and have 8 US Customs agents torment you."

Anonymous said...

It's not against the law to be pregnant. Why are pregnant women being treated as criminals? This is an attack on women. It's human rights abuse.

Anonymous said...

Why don't Sablan and Inos go after the guys profiting and promoting this? The former immigration head Mel Grey is even on websites promoting the Saipan US baby gig.

I also want to hear what these two elected officials that pushed for airport intervention have to say about this incident. You would think leaders would have made a statement and asked for an investigation by now!

Anonymous said...

I don't work for USCBP nor do I particularly like dealing with them when I travel, I just don't jump on lawsuit bandwagons.

If people are willing to just accept what some lawyer puts in a lawsuit they should be willing to consider other possibilities as well, if they are intellectually honest with themselves.

here is what was in the local newspapers and on the local news.

both husband and wife were denied visas by the U.S. Dept. of State to visit the U.S. Mainland on at least two separate occasions.

One reason the State Dept. denies visas is because they don't believe the persons will comply with the terms of the visas.

Less than a month after the most recent denial the couple decides they won't go to the U.S. Mainland for "vacation" they will go to Saipan instead.

The woman is a teacher in China, the Chinese school year begins in Sept and the first session runs to Dec. Yet this woman takes her "vacation" within a month of school starting, just after the classes start.

How many teachers do that?

The woman is denied entry and returned to China, but her husband continues the "vacation" without her. He didn't get on a plane right away to go back when she wasn't allowed in?

How many husbands wouldn't get right back on a plane to be with their wife?

he stayed so he could file this lawsuit people might say, ok but.....if she couldn't talk to him how did he know all this abuse his wife allegedly suffered while she was in "isolation" and she couldn't talk to him during the 22 hours + the travel time back to China.

He couldn't have known all the stuff that 'happened' to her cause he hadn't talked to her for over a day.

He didn't talk to her during this "isolation", she doesn't speak English, yet here are all these quotes the officers made to her in English??

These facts cast doubt on this "vacation".

A reasonable theory could be that this whole story was thought up with a Chinese facilitator on Saipan or in China.

He stays here and I am sure his authorized period to be in the U.S. has expired, his wife or even him filing a civil lawsuit doesn't give him a "right" to remain here.

Pregnant, not pregnant, ok, a little bit pregnant.....which is it?


People need to realize that when a foreign citizen arrives at a U.S. Port of Entry there is no right to be allowed in. You are standing on the 'porch' and knocking on the door. USCBP decides if you get to 'walk' through the door and into the U.S. or not.

Misrepresenting your intended purpose to come in, failing to provide truthful answers to any of their questions can result in that door being closed to you.

Taken into consideration with whatever info the Department of State may have provided USCBP on why these two were denied visas on several occasions to visit the U.S. and people can reasonably doubt the whole "vacation" line.

It will be interesting when the testimony is given by all and when all video is seen. All airports and arrival/departure terminals, even here in Saipan I bet, have plenty of cameras. One thing I bet the lawyer/client didn't count on.

And by the way who is this lawyer?

1. A guy who associates with the usual suspects of questionable character, trolling for clients to make a name for himself and a quick buck?

Or

2. A David here to take on Goliath, who came to Saipan to champion for the downtrodden?

knowing our sad history with some lawyers on this island which one you likely to believe?

Wendy Doromal said...

This isn't about jumping on a lawsuit bandwagon. When the Governor and Delegate made a public plan to prevent pregnant Chinese women from entering the CNMI it was clear that such a discriminatory act would result in disaster. It appears that it has. Is this one case only? We do not know that right now. We do not know how the other 20 or more pregnant women who came to Saipan for vacation and were turned away were treated. We do not know if they too were locked up, assaulted , strip searched harassed or tormented as the victim in the lawsuit claims.

LOTS of people have visas rejected -lots of Americans, lots of Filipinos, lots of Chinese. Odd that the husband had the same exact status as the wide but was let through -no case there. It is not the past visa that matters. A visa was issued and therefore the woman should have been entitled to enter if her husband with the same exact visa history was allowed. Perhaps you are making a case that the Guam-CNMI Chinese-Russian Visa Program should be stopped? It appears that you are.

You say: "Less than a month after the most recent denial the couple decides they won't go to the U.S. Mainland for "vacation" they will go to Saipan instead.

The woman is a teacher in China, the Chinese school year begins in Sept and the first session runs to Dec. Yet this woman takes her "vacation" within a month of school starting, just after the classes start. How many teachers do that?"


LOTS of teachers do that! I know a teacher who took a cruise the first month of school because it was a family reunion. Teachers who have vacation time should be able to vacation when they want to! Or should there be a rule about that like the rule about being pregnant and Chinese?!

Wendy Doromal said...

to 5:13 continued. . .

You make up all these hypothetical situations that could have happened to discredit a woman who claims to have had her human rights seriously violated. You do the same with her lawyer Why? What stake do you have in this? Who are you anonymous commenter? Do you think it's constitutional to single out pregnant Chinese women? Really? How in the world DHS jumped on this insane plan is beyond my comprehension. I wonder what you would think if the pregnant woman was an American entering China and she was treated like this or perhaps your wife or sister. Okay then? What would the US Government think if pregnant American women were screened in this way? Screened at all because they "might be pregnant!?

Who am I likely to believe? I believe the attorney and the woman. Every one of the 8 agents should be suspended until an independent and thorough investigation is completed. This is a horrific, sick, demented policy. What does the Chinese Consulate think of this? The Chinese Government? The DHS? The State Department? The USDOJ? Let's find out. . .

Anonymous said...

What does the Chinese Government think about this ? They will probably have her arrested and charged with treason. Two thirds of Chinese nationals cannot even enter the big cities without a special Chinese work visa especially pregnant women ! Lawyer Mok is a scummy attorney who is trying to make some fast money but don't worry. The Feds will fight this to trial.

Wendy Doromal said...

Who is worried? I am not worried. I will fight this disgusting discriminatory screening policy. The CNMI wants tourists? Really? One would not guess this the way that they are treated!!!! Every tourist of every gender and nationality and age must be treated equally. DHS must stop the discriminatory policy -stop locking up innocent women for 22 hours. Stop screening pregnant women more thoroughly than other tourists. Stop the human rights abuses.

The attorney is "scummy"? I do not know what you mean. What do you base this statement on? I have no evidence of that. I do know that a person cannot be judged by his/her attorney's reputation. An attorney's reputation should not determine a client's innocence or guilt, or perhaps it does in the CNMI? Is this what you are saying?

It's not your money! said...

Helpful information, Anon 5:13. Thank you. If the woman had made misrepresentations in her prior attempts to obtain a visa, she would be ineligible for admission. See the attached link to the visa waiver application. http://forms.cbp.gov/pdf/cbp_form_i736.pdf

Her complaint seems over the top, as is often the case with made-up stories. The plaintiffs will have to prove their allegations of mistreatment if they want to recover damages. Every allegation that is refuted will undermine the believability of the whole story.

Wendy Doromal said...

Hi It's Not Your Money - Helpful if it is factual. Over the top? I have heard worse Saipan cases than this one. Over the top was Dubrall beating an innocent Chinese and the USDOJ never even prosecuting the case. Terrible and over the top. Over the top were some forced prostitution cases.

What makes you so sure this woman is not truthful? The zeal with which Sablan, Inos and others insisted no pregnant Chinese enter Saipan, while at the same time insisting there are no problems with the Chinese visa waiver program is questionable. Obviously the CBP agents were instructed to question Chinese women about their pregnancy. If not, how would 20 or more be "turned away" over recent months as was reported?

Even if her papers were out of order, her attorney stated her husband had the same exact visa history and was let through.Should we assume that the agents either 1. are discriminatory or 2. do not do their job well.

Clearly, if so many are getting out of China under the Guam-CNMI Visa Waiver Program while having visa and document problems then the program is extremely problematic and should be stopped.

7:21

Who is worried? I am not worried. I will expose and fight this discriminatory entry policy. The CNMI wants tourists? Really? One would not guess that the way they are treated. Should I pull up ALL of the stories about tourists being treated poorly at Saipan International? About the irregularities in security and screening including that of ex-AG Buckingham?

Every tourist of every gender, age and nationality entering the US should be screened in the same manner and treated equally. This is not the case in Saipan.

Wendy Doromal said...

Also, concerning visa denials. The woman may not have made misrepresentations on her application. Was that reported anywhere? It was stated that her husband was allowed in and had the same exact visa history as his wife. The denial could have been for paperwork omissions or other errors. See this link: http://www.path2usa.com/us-visa-refusal-denial-and-reapplication

Anonymous said...

B1/B2 visa or tourist visa does not guaranty an entry to the bearer and it is stated in clearly at DHS website. The final approval is in the hands of immigration officer at the airport. Normally, that officer ask questions to satisfy himself(officer) that the tourist is coming to use the visa as intended. This visa normally allows 3 months of stay and can be extended when request is granted by USCIS. Officer can stamp tourist passport for 3 day, 1 month stay (as he wish,I don't know) Years ago, when I went to Japan, I was allowed 7 days to stay though my visa was valid for a year. 7 days was fine with me because my intention is only to tour around. I have no intention of giving birth there. My documents said so, I have my return ticket valid for 3 days with me upon entry. Saipan is really small and tourist can see the whole island in just one day, so why allow pregnant women to stay for long?


Wendy Doromal said...

8:38 Oh, I see. US officials can use that discretion to discriminate against pregnant Chinese women! Amazing!

Anonymous said...

8:38 said: "Saipan is really small and tourist can see the whole island in just one day, so why allow pregnant women to stay for long?"

Why allow anyone to stay for long? Why do you say pregnant women? Please tell us where else in the United States of America are pregnant tourists expected to have limited stays because they are pregnant?

Anonymous said...

The "chamber" now supports improved status...as long as they still get low min wages, don't need to hire citizens, and their majority alien members can continue to employ themselves and their extended families (for a fee of course) as CW workers.

Wendy Doromal said...

10:55 Yes I saw that. The Chamber of Commerce across the US is now supporting immigration. Your comment is so spot on!

It's not your money! said...

Wendy, I'm not convinced she is not truthful, but I am skeptical. This one doesn't pass the smell test for me; it sounds as like something written for a made-for-TV movie by someone with a persecution complex and an overdeveloped sense of melodrama. But I could be wrong.

Just because some stories that are over the top are true, doesn't mean they all are. There are two sides to every story, and it's best to let the process play out. If there is any evidence that she was subjected to such treatment, it will come out.

Wendy Doromal said...

Hi It's Not Your Money:

Of course, I respect your opinion especially because it's yours and I respect you. I really have a gut feeling this woman is telling the truth. I could be wrong too. BUT regardless, if I were the USDHS I would regard this incident as a wake up call and I would: 1. suspend every agent involved until a complete investigation was completed 2. re-train all personnel 3. cease all discriminatory screening policies 4. review detention policies - provide food and water; if needed, one body search should be sufficient; no manhandling, verbal abuse, intimidation, or abuse of any kind (unless a detainee is attacking or out of control).

Visitors should be regarded as guests to our country and treated with dignity and respect. These people will go back to their countries and tell these horror stories. Who would want to visit the CNMI after hearing this?

By the way the story was covered in the Bejing press (very poorly) here: http://www.newsking.us/news-5944527-Saipan-went-to-children-suspected-of-being-imprisoned-Chinese-woman-tourist-v-US-Customs-discrimination.html

Anonymous said...

(not sure about the timing) However could it be that the immigration cracked the whip after a pregnant tourist was found hiding under the stairs only days before?

Wendy Doromal said...

5:21 This raises another question about the airport security. How did a pregnant woman get from a plane to under the stairs at the airport? I saw this story and it made no sense.

Anonymous said...

I read this article and checked the links. HORRIFIED! I'm contacting the ACLU.

Angelo Villagomez said...

Wendy, do you think it is wrong for Chinese citizens to come to the USA to have American citizen babies? The government does, which is why this is happening. This is a national problem, not just one in the CNMI.

http://world.time.com/2013/11/27/chinese-women-are-flocking-to-the-u-s-to-have-babies/

Wendy Doromal said...

I know this is a problem. I also know it is not being approached correctly. I have been writing about this practice since 2008. This is not a new problem to the US or the CNMI. It used to be that the Koreans used the CNMI as a destination to give birth. Now it is predominately Chinese because of the visa waiver program. If the US Government does not want Chinese women delivering their babies in the U.S. then it can stop the visa waiver program and/or change the law. What the US should not do is to apply laws differently to visitors in a discriminatory way based on a visitor's gender and nationality. This incident if true, is about violating a person's constitutional, civil and human rights.

Anonymous said...

US Immigration and CBP acts in discriminatory and subjective fashion hundreds and thousands of times every day all over the country. Chuck can cross the border but Juan can't. Mr. Woodcock gets a VISA, but not Mr. Bonifacio. Mrs. Welke drives by, but Mrs. Suelo gets a full body search. Dan Shuster gets a wink and a smile, while Gomo Buthelezi gets fifty questions in a private room. Peggy Wolski gets a student VISA, but Lin Xingmin doesn't.

Anonymous said...

The officials need to be consistent and fair. There should be established guidelines and discretional limits that are adhered to for all.

Anonymous said...

"Federal takeover, you asked for..." oh never mind. Things are much worse under Federal control. CWs are on their way out. Chinese are being interrogated. Woodruff is in jail. Kilili can't make up his mind on any issues and jumps from one foot to the other trying to get reelected. Liberal activists living in the US mainland still try and meddle in CNMI affairs and still trying to destroy the economy. The activists are scurrying around like mice hiding in cracks and peeking out to see the turmoil. Ahhh, Saipan....

Anonymous said...

My wife, son, and I got Chinese visas in PI (225. each0). We passed them in at the same time. My wife got a 60 day 2 entry visa, my son got a one year multi-entry, and I got 30 days with one entry only (meaning I could exit to Vietnam & Mongolia as we had originally planned).

I politely asked if that was normal but was told that there is no complaint department...or tough and no refund on the 775.

Anonymous said...

The case has been fully dismissed with prejudice. The Officer involved (Jacobs) was found completely not guilty and the Attorney (Moc..#AMBULANCE CHASER) and clients lied about the entire thing. Video proved it as well as disposition given by Officer's involved. The Attorney and clients were given several months to prove the case and could not obtain any evidence of wrong doing on anyone's part. The attorney should be disbarred and never allowed to practice law anywhere ever again. The Attorney and clients have done a terrible thing to the lives of the Officers involved and to the community as well. ****It was learned that (Jacobs) was not even on shift when this supposed violation occurred against the teacher. SHAME ON THEM ALL!!!! What a waste of time and money for the tax payers and Officers!!!!