US Border staff refuse Canadian traveler and demand his DNA

He readily admitted that he was coming in to join a protest rally. Was he coming in for peaceful purposes or was he coming in to cause trouble? The border agents don't know the answer to that so he was denied.

I can't answer as to why they wanted a DNA sample. It's possible they wanted to see if he was actually someone else traveling on false identification. There are many people who travel to the US with false documents to cause trouble.

However, the next time he wanted to enter he was admitted because he was coming to visit relatives.

You can travel anywhere you want, but if you are coming for legitimate tourist reasons, you shouldn't have a problem.

I'm sorry to hear this story. I don't blame Canadians for staying away. We're American and we took 4 vacations to Canada last year and will do the same this year. We love Canada! (We're pretty close to the border.) It's sad our current regime is hell bent on making an enemy of our closest neighbor and friend.

....America,

You spelled Magastan wrong...

Frank II- they didn't need a DNA sample to confirm his identity. What good is a single sample unless another sample had already been in the US system to compare it to? They had his passport. Fingerprints would have shown if he had a criminal record in either country. They had records of his previous entries into the US. So that excuse doesn't fly.

This was an instance of unnecessary and arbitrary coercion and blackmail on the part of CBP, dependant (IMO) largely on the colour of baseball cap the agent wears when off duty. This man wasn't trying to cause trouble. He was trying to join a legal rally to show his support for the millions of other people who were participating in those same rallies all over the world. And as usual, requests for clarification of why that sample was demanded, sent by Canadian officials and Sen Raskin to DHS and Dept of State have met a brick wall. And stil there are members of this forum who pooh pooh the notion that there are reasons why tourists are avoiding going to the US.

I doubt this thread will survive more than 18 hours.

This article has some information in it, mostly about how 2 Democratic representatives (Michigan and Maryland) tried to find out why this happened. It looked like it happened back in October, and then, like Frank mentioned, he came over a month later and was granted entry.

I agree that it shouldn't have happened, and I'm sure the fact that he was attending a protest was the major factor, but there's no reason they should have forced him into a DNA test. All they had to do was just refuse entry.

https://debbiedingell.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=6693

Instead of heading to Michigan to protest, he should travel to Russia to protest the behavior of their "King" and his current effort of invading another country. Now that would be a real show of protest.

The second thing is that his DNA was collected to be on file in case he enters the country later on and his DNA appears at a scene of a crime.

cos nothink says 'criminal' like a paunchy retired Canuck wearing a loud t-shirt and storing his country's flag in the back seat

I am done. The '77 Max Webster band lyric about 'going American Express'

PS Agreed CJean. Maybe 12 hours...?

Threadwear

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pvXRl21lB8

Just for you.

I agree the world of brutal capitalism should be confined to your land. Kaiser Trump has his eyes set on the prize of world domination.

Need 007 to save us.

to spent elsewhere in some other country.10101010

nned to visit the USA soon0202

money that we'd have spent at12121212

the USA soon.131313

hem. We had planned to visit the U171717

FrankII,

We will never know what he said. Remember what is published has the validity of a first time poster here trashing a car rental company because they didn’t get what they wanted; there is no other side to the incident reported. The best I could find was a Canadian new agency report that the US government said he was inconsistent in his reasons for traveling. I imagine it’s possible that this isn’t the first protest he has traveled to the US to participate in and his name was on a watch list. When asked he might of lied.

"On Oct. 18, 2025, a 68-year-old Canadian citizen arrived at the Blue Water Bridge," the statement said. "In secondary inspection, the alien gave inconsistent answers for his reason for traveling to the U.S. He was deemed inadmissible and allowed to withdraw his application for admission, and allowed to voluntarily depart the U.S. A DNA sample was collected in accordance with the law – DNA Fingerprint Act of 2005 – due to this immigration violation." (CBC News)

According to the Federal Register the DNA Fingerprint Act of 2005 directs agencies of the United States that arrest or detain individuals, or that supervise individuals facing charges, to collect DNA samples from individuals who are arrested, facing charges, or convicted, and from non-United States persons who are detained under the authority of the United States.

People should be furious about the law if they dont like it, not the people obeying the law by enforcing it. What we need is legislation that preserves the right for foreign nationals to enter the US, not for tourism, not for work, but for the sole purpose of protesting against the US government. That would satisfy many and fill Aeroflot flights from Russia on Putin's dime.

But if you report sex crimes and trafficking of minors to the FBI, nothing is done.

Thanks to Gregg for posting this. Also thanks to the usual defenders of the abhorrent and whimsical policies of the current regime. Your consistency is admirable and utterly predictable.

Let's clear a few things up.

People forget that until you are admitted into the US, you are not, technically, in the US.

In this case, the Canadian man had not yet been admitted into the US. So, he did not have true Constitutional protection. It also shows that perhaps his side of the story was not all the facts. Afterall, why would the media print a one sided sensationalist story, he says sarcastically.

The FBI can't automatically demand a DNA sample from anyone without court approval because that person has protection under the Constitution. And how do you know nothing is done if you report a possible crime? They aren't going to discuss this with you.

This is the law. It's been like that for a long time. It's not just the policy of a particular politican or party.

For those of you who think this is political, keep in mind that the President with the most removals of illegal aliens during his term was....Barack Obama. He just didn't make a big deal out of it.

When I worked in the tour industry, and was in training, I got to spend a day with the immigration and customs agents at LAX. (This was a long time ago.) It was amazing how many people tried to scam the system and either enter fraudulently or sneak things in.

Travel lesson--when entering a country, be aware of the rules and abide by them.

This is an unfortunate incident.

Border control agents have broad authority to deny entry. Their training and the protocols they use normally have constrained them from exercising their authority in manners such as this. Current management practice appears to have changed and hence border officials feel greater liberty to “police” in new ways.

If I were to travel to Canada— which I will be in a couple weeks— wearing a t-shirt that read “The Maple Leafs stink”, the Canadian border control could I suppose refuse my entry. More likely, he’d let me in and say something like “you make a fair point.” He wouldn’t take my DNA though.

Maybe to discourage this new outrageous behavior, Canada border guards should reject entry for anybody wearing, oh, I dunno, red hats? Bad idea I suppose. Let’s just get back to normal.

Happy travels.

P.S. a few years back I went to the Shaw Festival and they put on a smashing production of the Madness of King George. I mention this now for no particular reason.

Order of sentences rearranged:

"A DNA sample was collected in accordance with the law – DNA
Fingerprint Act of 2005 – due to this immigration violation."

"He was deemed inadmissible and allowed to withdraw his application for
admission, and allowed to voluntarily depart the U.S." (CBC News)

I don't understand. If he was allowed to withdraw his application for admission, turn around and go back where he came from, what was the immigration violation?? Asking to enter?

And collecting DNA from someone "just in case" they might commit a crime later???

Also thanks to the usual defenders of the abhorrent and whimsical policies of the current regime. Your consistency is admirable and utterly predictable.

...and thanks to Frank II for pointing out this type of denial and procedures have been in place and happening for decades. Also, these border entry procedures have been heightened since 9/11 for obvious good reasons.

This article is just media hype because of the media's addiction to the "current regime".

If your intent is to enter another country to protest or disrupt, you do so at your own risk. You have a right to come to the US and protest, but the US, as do other countries, have a right to deny entry to anyone.

Next time you travel to a country in Europe be sure to tell officials at the border you are there to start a protest against their government policies. See how that works out for you.

This whole conversation about this article is absurd. I admire all people who are staying away from the US for the next 3 years because of the "current regime". I may think it isn't worth it, but that is a choice of others which is "admirable".

It doesn't do any good and won't change policies, but it is always admirable when people stick to a personal boycott.

If you choose not to travel to a country as a "political act", that is "admirable" and a personal choice. However, if you do travel to a foreign country, as mentioned, be sure you know what the laws are before you give two different reasons at the border as to why you are entering the country.

I don't understand. If he was allowed to withdraw his application for
admission, turn around and go back where he came from, what was the
immigration violation?? Asking to enter?

khansen, I don’t know but its sort of nice that they protected his privacy but not making it public. Actually, legally, I don’t think they can say anything. Sort of makes it easy for the other side to spread lies and beat up on the working stiffs at immigration.

It happens in reverse. My son about 10 years ago was entering Canada on a business trip. He worked for a major software provider for medical facilities. He was asked if he had committed a crime or if he had a criminal record (I honestly don’t know the exact language used) but he was raised well and he confessed to having been detained for being drunk and disorderly at the beach when he was in college 10 years earlier. I say detained because there is no police record of it. They authorities decided not to mess up kids’ futures for things like that. He was denied entry into Canada. He had to return home, halfway across the US, and explain it to his employer. He never bad talked the Canadians for it. He knew 1) he shouldn’t have gotten drunk and 2) he maintained his integrity by being honest.

You have a right to come to the US and protest,

Threadweare, I don’t know if that is correct. I read what I could find on the Canadian visa waver, and it says: “Purpose: Must be for temporary visits (tourism, business, pleasure).” We can joke about finding pleasure in protesting I guess but I suspect you would need to go to court and fight it (and I hope lose) if US immigration says that coming to the US for the sole purpose of protesting against the US government is not pleasure. Its also in very bad form to bad talk your host inside the house of your host.

I forgot to mention the Shaw Festival is in Niagara-on-the-Lake, which is a town in Ontario.

Charming. Anybody thinking of going to Canada, I highly recommend it.

I should also give you the bones of the plot:

In the Madness of King George, George the III goes nuts. The king's cabinet knows if folks find out how screwy he is, George's allies-- the oligarchs and aristocrats close to him-- will get sacked. So they lock him up.

This last bit is key. Without it, the play doesn't work.

Happy travels.

David,

Thank you for the explanation of the Shaw Festival! And.... I get what you're saying!....

Thank you David! Your post made me laugh this morning. May art and life intertwine. We love the Shaw Fest and NOTL. The Stratford Fest is great, too.

Just to clarify, Canadians aren't staying away out of mere protest, because we simply don't like the current regime (which isn't true of all Canadians, but IS true of most). Many of us are staying away because it is unsafe for us to travel to the US currently. Our sovereignty has been threatened, not just once, not just as a joke, but multiple times over a period of many months. It is not safe for us to travel to a place whose leader is threatening us. And given that leader's actions against other countries, we have no reason to doubt his serious intent.

Would people have dismissed Ukrainians choosing to avoid travel to Russia pre-2022 as "personal boycotts"?

It's not simply about boycotting. Myself, and many others I know, will not even change planes in the US, because it is not safe. I have chosen more expensive routing on my trips to avoid doing so.

It is not just a political statement, so kindly disabuse yourselves of that notion.

Thank you.

"Conscience is but a word that cowards use..." — Richard (Act 5, Scene 3)

Stratford Festival is amazing. I was lucky enough to catch a performance of Richard III years ago.

Happy ending!

Good times.

I also saw King Lear. Stirring.

“Tis the times' plague, when madmen lead the blind.”

Happy travels

BB,

I can certainly understand those who stay away out of protest or personal conviction. Sometimes the issue is pure politics, sometimes its a thing much more tangiable. Some things that an individual chooses to do, he chooses for his own integrity and the impact upon the situation is less important. So, even when political, I would never criticize that.

I can also understand your apprehension to cross the border right now. I think the fear has been manufactured for political gain or is the product of a base hatred planted and nourished by those looking for political gain; but heck, I could be wrong and when it comes to safety and wellbeing you would be remiss not to follow your gut and your intuition and your analysis of the situation. Knowing in my own life when I ignored my feelings that something always went wrong, I am 100% with you on this.

G-d bless and keep you safe.

You have a right to come to the US and protest

I doubt this very seriously.

“What rights do immigrants, including undocumented immigrants, have to engage
in protest actions?
• Right to free speech. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government
from restricting your right to free speech. This means that you have a right to participate in
political protests, marches, and demonstrations. The First Amendment also protects freedom of
the press (among other rights). These rights apply to everyone in the U.S., regardless of
immigration status. However, courts are not consistent in vindicating the First Amendment
rights of immigrants. People who are undocumented therefore should plan carefully, because
they cannot rely on the courts to protect their First Amendment rights.“. Source: https://media.nilc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Protest-Know-Your-Rights-nilc-2020.pdf

Seems like a well regarded source, however, the article was published in 2020. Not certain if it reflects current policy.

And given that leader's actions against other countries, we have no reason to doubt his serious intent.

Comparing the country of Canada to Maduro's socialistic Venezuela or the theocratic terrorist regime of Iran in which the US intervened in both is an interesting perspective?

Would people have dismissed Ukrainians choosing to avoid travel to Russia pre-2022 as "personal boycotts"?

Is there really a serious belief the global community (NATO and the UN) would allow the US to invade Canada as Russia/Putin has invaded Ukraine?

Redheadlibrarian is correct. People have the right to free speech and the right to protest while in this country, citizen or not. However, if arrested, detained or identified during a protest as a non-US citizen, future entry into the US can and most likely will be denied.

Is there really a serious belief the global community (NATO and the UN) would allow the US to invade Canada as Russia/Putin has invaded Ukraine?

Not interested in being gaslit about this. I have heard the words come out of your leader's mouth. Seditionists here have also been offered $500000 US to help their "cause."

While in the US visitors have the same protection under the Constitution as US citizens. ( Barring any specific rights allowed only to US citizens such as voting.)

However, if you are not a US citizen you can be prevented from entering the US for numerous reasons. Telling an immigration officer you plan to protest, or change your story, will not look good in your favor. This has nothing to do with the current administration. This has been policy for decades.

One of the main jobs of a border agent is to protect their country from those who may want to enter to cause harm.

There are numerouse TV shows showing immigration agents in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the UK. In each you can see the agents refuse entry to people who either change the reason they are trying to enter the country or for reasons not aligned with normal tourist activities.

If you are undocumented, and in
the US, you have the right to protest. But, the first amendment will not stop immigration agents from processing you for removal. without proper documenrts you are in the country illegally. That's been the law under Trump, Biden, Obama, Bush, Clinton, etc etc etc. Nothing has changed.

With all due respect "This has nothing to do with the current administration. This has been policy for decades.", this is an amazing assertion.

Yes, border control can refuse entry based on suspicion of just about anything-- and they have. But no, this is not how it has been for decades. Asking for DNA is not normal. A president referring to the head of state as a governor. This is not normal. US congressmen writing letters about this. This is not normal.

I find it disconcerting that so many are defending the bully and not the bullied.

At times like this I sometimes ask myself, what would Rick Steves do? First, he'd probably let the Canadian in without hesitation. Second he wouldn't have asked for DNA. And finally if he were a Canadian, he would still travel to the US-- although he'd take precautions that he never used to consider before. Also he'd visit Cleveland -- home of Rock'n Roll.

Okay, I may be daydreaming again. Sorry.

Happy travels.

Undocumented or documented, citizen or non-citizen, the Trump administration has tried to revoke visas and deport foreign students and faculty members who participated in pro-Palestinian protests. Obviously this violates First Amendment protections against punishing political speech.

His exact words? Trump has argued that "If people come into our country without documents, there's a different standard [for due process]," which goes completely against long-standing Supreme Court precedent holding that the "due process" clause applies to everyone on US soil; not just citizens. He has chosen to disregard that, which is a whole issue in itself. While it is true that originally the Supreme Court did not have the power it does today, that changed in the early 1800's with Chief Justice John Marshall's decision re: judicial review in Marbury v. Madison, and that policy has continued since then. For Trump to be trying to change that now is an extremely dangerous practice, and I'm sure that Chief Justice Roberts is monitoring these types of cases very carefully.

Mardee, I will be the first to say I don’t like a lot of what the law permits. But the law does permit. The DNA is stipulated in law in the very circumstance stated. Okay, I am no attorney, but no one has argued the point, they just make personal insults. If the previous administration didn’t follow the law to the extent required, that’s the issue. Laws should be followed or amended. For that I blame the legislature. The current Supreme Court has a majority of Original Intent justices. As a result, the score right now is about 20 wins and 6 losses for the president. That means the president will have trouble reinventing the law to suit his needs. That also means it’s more important that the Legislature do its job; and they haven’t. Don’t blame one party or the other. If you look at who has controlled the legislature for the last 25 years it seems to be about even.

Most important from my point of view is that we have a good system and a strong constitiution. That doesnt mean daily perfection, but it does mean in the long run things will be corrected where they need correction and in the long run the nation will survive. First I believe that to be fact and second because of how I feel about some of what is going on, I need to believe that is true.

OP, you must be from the Philippines. I got spanked for not knowing.

Johnny Shandoo & the Pyramids, from the album: 'Johnny and the Boys Rockin' Out at the Turnip Fest'

'Cities full of hatred, fear and lies.
Withered hearts and cruel, tormented eyes.
Scheming demons dressed in kingly guise.
Beating down the multitude
and scoffing at the wise.'

I am done. the lyrix from '77

I prefer older words:

https://poets.org/poem/second-coming

[snip]
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

It quote King Lear:

A Canuck who came to the border,
To put Trump back into order,
Found his DNA taken,
And his privacy shaken,
By a threat-of-jail-time disorder.

What? That's not Lear? Maybe MacBeth? Tomorrow and tomorrow and etc etc etc... Did I ever tell you guys about the time I insulted the Maple Leafs? They call that a hockey team??

Happy travels

They call that a hockey team??

Lol. No one but diehard, born and bred fans would call the Leafs a hockey team.

From a born and bred Habs fan.