No. “North America” is not any kind of political entity. There are many special allowances for Canadian citizens entering the US, and likewise for American citizens entering Canada, but anyone traveling on a passport from any other country is treated the same as if they were arriving directly from that country.
I’m back home in Brisbane. I was back in Brisbane, Australia, about 20 hours after being refused entry at LAX, @Spoons.
Qantas’s response wasn’t something I had thought about prior to them spelling it out for me. I have a habit of getting to the airport VERY early so, when I checked in at BNE, it would’ve been just on/over 24 hours before my LAX to Philadelphia flight would’ve opened for check in. That explains why I didn’t get that boarding pass. The Philadelphia to Montreal flight would’ve been at least 30 hours away from online check in opening when I checked in at BNE. But it still doesn’t take away from the fact immigration didn’t want to/refused to look at my baggage receipt (with connecting flight nos on it) or my email booking. I have forwarded Qantas’s email on to the CBP investigator.
Okay, so at least you’re in a place where you’re back home and comfortable; and not sitting on a bench (or worse) somewhere in an American airport, waiting for the American CBP to make some sort of decision. Good to hear.
If I can suggest, in seasons where there are no direct Queensland-Canada flights, that you bite the bullet, go south to Sydney, then get on a direct flight to Canada. You can avoid the US totally.
I find the same kind of thing from some European contacts of mine: “I’m trying to get from London (or Frankfurt or Rome or Paris or Zurich) to Toronto,” and then they complain about having to connect through New York or Newark. Well, here’s the thing: you do not have to connect through the US in order to get to Canada. There are direct flights to and from Canada (Toronto, Calgary, and Vancouver primarily) and Europe, Australia, and Asia daily. And yes, from Frankfurt, Rome, Paris, and Zurich, into Toronto and other Canadian destinations.
Although you gave a good reason upthread (and I understand it), I still cannot understand why anybody overseas would think that they could only get to Canada through the USA.
@Spoons, I have well and truly learnt my lesson 
I just received a very odd email where the person seems to (or claims to) know more about what’s happening with the CBP investigation than I do.
My email to you will not do much. I did raise your issue to Biden’s officials and the person said it was unfortunate and that it was an unusual case. However, the situation related to your event seems to have been resolved, since I read that the folks involved were investigated and corrections made. As much flack as the US government gets, your experience seems to have resolved itself.
Wish you the best.
I just found out another Australian got deported recently:
What do you think these two cases have to do with your case?
If some border policeman were reprimanded for improper behaviour, would you (or the public) expect to be told any details? A formally apologetic letter? Or is it more, “case closed”? In which case the content of that email does not seem so odd.
@Telemark, I don’t think there’s anything remotely similar between the three stories—it’s just that we’re all Australian citizens who were refused entry to the United States. And each of us got treated pretty terribly in the process.
@DPRK, the CBP OPR assistant commissioner said he would provide me an update when I emailed him about two weeks ago. I only emailed him because the special agent who was/is investigating stopped responding to my emails. I also don’t expect to be apologised to publicly (or at all, actually), but I think I deserve an update.
Also, the person who emailed me, I asked them where they heard the matter had been resolved. They quoted a Daily Mail article that said the matter was being investigated… See towards the end for the generic statement from CBP:
UPDATE
CBP told The Daily Beast I was asked by the officer about ‘loss of pregnancy’ and the officer definitely didn’t say ‘abortion’. Two days later, they told the Daily Mail and my local newspaper (can’t link the story because it’s behind a paywall), the officer asked me about ‘termination of pregnancy’. Which one is it, CBP? Oh, that’s right, it was abortion.
CBP said these questions are asked to ensure the health of those in airport detention. But, note, I wasn’t asked any other health-related questions until 10 minutes before my entry was refused/about two hours after I got brought in for further questioning. And this question was something like: ‘Are you on any medication?’
Obfuscate is the word of every day for the CBP and the media. Thank you for the clarification. You were asked about an abortion. They can be such asshats.
That second story has another, and perhaps even more horrifying, link to a different story:
This guy wasn’t jailed for 10 days, just 30 hours, but after being handcuffed and strip-searched, was thrown into a jail cell that sounds like it belongs in some third-world hell-hole. His crime? He was planning to backpack through Mexico and South America, but failed to meet the condition that he have an outbound flight from the US to another country not bordering the US (or a return flight). After his strip-search and jail ordeal, he was then sent back to Australia – to the wrong city.
It’s not only Australians and many others who are subject to this mistreatment by US CPB. It happens to Canadians, too, despite the reciprocal special status of cross-border travel by citizens of those countries.
One story I recall – and there have been many – goes back to the early days of the Trump administration, when anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim rhetoric seemed to have emboldened CPB to even more arbitrary and egregious acts of cruelty. A group of young women were crossing the border to go to a spa in a US border state (I think it was Vermont). One of them was of Indian descent, but was a naturalized Canadian citizen. She was directed to secondary inspection; the other women (all white) were cleared through.
Ultimately she was told that she needed a visa to enter the US. She was appalled, but, not wanting to be barred from the US forever, applied for one through the US Consulate. Unsurprisingly, the consultate informed her that there was no such thing as a visitor’s visa for a Canadian citizen, since no such visa is ever required. It was a case of two US agencies contradicting each other, and she was caught in the middle, helpless, apparently because she looked like she might be Muslim. I don’t know if or how this was ever resolved.
There was an old story, if someone can find it for us, of a U.S. consular officer who told of being harassed, having her safety threatened, and ultimately being forced out of a promising career because she tried to actually do her job and interview visa candidates properly. I believe it was this woman
So being a diplomat was no help, either.
US residents seem to be treated just as terribly! Have a read:
https://twitter.com/UChadayammuri/status/1571282138795839488?s=20&t=laJJzNoTWg650m300IIkNw
There’s no doubt that the US (like any large country) will have some bad apples among their border patrol agents. And there are probably some institutional biases that need to be examined and addressed. But a few anecdotes don’t really make the compelling case.
For example, in the Tweet you linked to the comments pointed out that the person didn’t have a green card, so technically they didn’t live in the US. While it may be common practice to say someone in the US for 13 years “lives” here, according to the law she is not a resident. Certainly the way that was communicated could have been better, and the delay in entry could have been avoided, but the headline isn’t a great representation of the details of the story.
I must not have clicked on these articles before today- but I’m kind of wondering what exactly is the problem with the second situation. I can understand that someone would not want to be strip searched and held in detention for 10 days - but I’m not sure what else should have happened when someone comes to the US without a visa, doesn’t qualify for a visa-waiver program ,was planning to interview for a job as a mechanic and apparently told immigration officials that he didn’t want to return home and had a “minor fear” about returning. I’m not sure what people think should have been done- should they have sent him back to Australia without a hearing even though he said he didn’t want to return and had some fear about returning?*
I’m not going to speak about the jail conditions - but in the article, it says Dunn called on the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade to advertise this rule on its website rather than just referring people to US websites. The article says the US websites don’t mention the rules, but this was on the website about the visa waiver program linked in the article :
If you are admitted to the United States under the VWP, you may take a short trip to Canada, Mexico, or a nearby island and generally be readmitted to the United States under the VWP for the remainder of the original 90 days granted upon your initial arrival in the United States. Therefore, the length of time of your total stay, including the short trip, must be 90 days or less. See the CBP website. Citizens of VWP countries* who reside in Mexico, Canada, or a nearby island are generally exempted from the requirement to show onward travel to another country* when entering the United States. Learn more on the CBP website.
I’m kind of wondering what would happen if I showed up in Australia with a tourist visa and said that I was planning to apply for a job as a mechanic or do some pet-sitting for strangers in return for a place to stay, as neither of those seem to be allowed with a visitor visa.
*The article doesn’t dispute that he said those things, just that what he really meant was that he was afraid of wasting money on his tickets and being lectured by his family
There’s a show on youtube called Border Security - Australia and they regularly turn people away who are planning to work, or simply don’t have the financial means to support themselves. The agents go through their phones, papers, etc, to find evidence. I find the show rather fascinating. There are similar shows from Canada, the UK, and others.
When there’s no flight available right away to the home country the detainees are kept in custody, but usually only for a day or so. It gets much more complicated if they have contraband.
Those shows really are fascinating.
I find it interesting how they each have a different kind of issue that they deal with.
The Canadian show focuses on tourist/work visa issues, dumb Americans bringing in a few joints or a legal firearm, and drug smuggling.
The Australian show focuses on tourist/work visa issues, undeclared foods that pose a risk to Australia, and drug smuggling.
The UK show focuses on cigarette smugglers, illegal immigration from Calais via trucks, and drug smuggling.
The Brazilian show focuses on undeclared imports such as iPhones, computers, and fancy camera gear, as well as drug smuggling.
The common theme is drug smuggling, but each country has its nuance. For example, on the UK show they really hammer people over a carton of cigarettes.
The issue, in this particular thread, is how CBP treats international travellers. Not how Australian Border Force might treat you.
Also, the process for entering Australia once you disembark is almost entirely automated. So unless the system has something on you, it’s unlikely you’ll speak to anyone until you get to customs to declare things (at which point you’re essentially ‘in’ the country).
To some extent, my opinion of how CBP treats international travelers is going to be informed by how other countries treat people who do the same thing, such as arrive planning to work without the correct visa for working. It doesn’t entirely depend on what other countries do - but I feel like there’s a bit of “The US doesn’t get to decide what “work” means or who is eligible for their visa waiver program - everyone should be allowed into the US , even if they don’t have the proper approval” and I’m pretty sure that no country in the world does that.