There are some Mexicans who would like to illegally cross the border with the U.S. There are also some Mexicans who are perfectly happen in Mexico, but who might want to visit the U.S. as tourists, just like Americans wish to visit Mexico.
Since the border control would want to stop the first group and let the second group pass, how do they differentiate between them?
A visa is required for a foreign citizen to enter the U.S. (except Canadians). Unless they’ve loosened it up because of NAFTA.
FWIW, I see a fair number of Mexican license plates on my daily commutes.
Mexicans still need visas. In practice, they aren’t simple to get; you need to convince a consular officer that you have something to come home to, because the legal assumption is that all visa applicants are intending immigrants unless they can prove otherwise. Proof of job, family, financial resources, etc. are all helpful in this regard. It’s not just a matter of filling out a form.
Citizens of 27 other countries are permitted to enter the U.S. for up to 90 days for tourism or business under the Visa Waiver Program.
Mexicans cross into Texas over the international bridges every day, on foot and in cars. Never seen them do much more than show some ID.
The ID you saw might be a Border Crossing Card. It’s a wallet-size card with photo and encapsulated biometric info, good for 10 years. Many people who live near the border get them to go shopping, etc. IIRC it allows for an unlimited number of 72-hour visits within 50 miles of the border, and is good for 10 years.
My father- and mother-in-law had something similar that allowed them to enter anywhere in the US to conduct business (not to work, to conduct their own business). Their visas were good for life, but recently that program stopped and all they could get were 10 yeear visas.
When I met and decided to marry their daughter, we attempted to get her a tourist visa so she could come check the place out. We went to the US Embassy twice and they wouldn’t give her a tourist visa as all. Judging from the other applicants, I tend to see why everyone was treated like cattle (both times they told my wife no without looking at the paperwork).
When we went to Cd. Juarez later, though, for the K1 visa, the treatment was completely the opposite. We felt like royalty. We were rushed through mostly everything while everyone else looked like they’d been there for weeks.
My sister-in-law is a land baroness. It took her an address change to be able to go to the Guadajara consulate instead of Mexico City to get her tourist visa. Seems like the Mexico City embassy is pretty much a prick to everyone.
(Depending where you live in the country and the type of visa, you go to either the Embassy in Mexico city or various consulates throughout the country).
That is only true for another month and a half. Thereafter the WVP only applies to people with a new machine-readable passport. If you don’t have a machine-readable passport you will have to wait about 8 weeks and pay about USD 100 for a visa.
Also, if you’re a journalist, the WVP does not apply, and you will need a visa.
In order to be in line with the OP, it should also be pounted out that the WVP does not include Mexico.
[nitpick]
Most citizens of Visa Waiver-eligible countries have machine-readable passports at this point, as they’ve been issued for several years now. As for journalists: if they’re coming on vacation they are treated the same way as everyone else who is a national of the same country. If they’re coming to work, though, they do need the appropriate visa. But then the same goes for almost anyone who is coming to work, journalist or no.
Processing times for work visas, or any visas for that matter, vary widely according to time of year, type of visa, and other staffing-related issues. At some consulates lately they are issued the same day as your appointment, but it can take a week or two to get an appointment. At others it can take several weeks to get an appointment, and a week or more afterward for the visa to be issued.
Just out of curiosity, have you got a cite for that? I know that in Sweden they have been issued since 1998, and as they are valid for 10 years, that means that many people still haven’t changed. (My passport is good for another three years, but if I’m going the the US ahead of that, I’ll have to get a new passport. - it’s a lot cheaper than a visa.)
Other datapoints: The Swiss have only been issuing machine readable passports since january this year, and apparently only about 50% of the French passports in circulation are machine readable.
UK is better, and it looks like all current UK passports are machine-readable.
In Germany they have been issuing machine-readable passports since 1988, but not exclusively. There are plenty of non-machine readable passports in circulation.
Well, I would have to dig for a specific cite, but I do U.S. visas for a living (I’m an immigration paralegal). I will admit that we don’t see so many Swiss in my office; the Spanish passports have been the biggest headache lately, and we deal with far more Spaniards. Also, the people we are dealing with are younger (generally in their 20’s and 30’s) and more likely to have recently issued passports.
We’ve been telling people to get new passports if they can, but there are backlogs for that, too. Combined with European August vacations and reduced staffing in many government offices, it’s been somewhat of a logistical nightmare.
OK, here’s a cite from a recent State Department cable:
“P 121728Z JUN 03
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO ALL DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR POSTS PRIORITY
[snip]
FOR CONSULAR SECTION CHIEFS AND NIV CHIEFS
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: CVIS, CMGT
SUBJECT: MACHINE-READABLE PASSPORT REQUIRED FOR ALL VISA WAIVER TRAVELERS BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2003
Ref: A) State 98800 B) 02 State 166090
This is an action message for all posts. See para 5 below.
Summary. Beginning October 1, 2003, each Visa Waiver Program (VWP) traveler must present a machine-readable passport (MRP) in order to enter the U.S. visa-free. Because many expatriates from VWP countries travel on passports that were issued abroad and are not machine- readable, posts may see an increase in the number of NIV applications from VWP nationals. All posts, including those in non-VWP countries, are asked to develop an outreach strategy to the travel industry, the media, and the VWP traveling public. End summary.
Section 417 of the USA Patriot Act of 2001 advanced from October 1, 2007, to October 1, 2003, the requirement of Section 217 the INA that all VWP travelers present a valid MRP for visa-free entry into the U.S. (Note: per reftel A, the date for Belgium is May 15, 2003. End note.) Most VWP countries began issuing MRPs in the early or mid-1990s, so most VWP travelers will have no trouble complying with this requirement. Some countries, notably Switzerland (which only began MRP production this year), Italy, and Spain, may find that significant portions of their traveling public will need either a replacement passport or an NIV [nonimmigrant visa].
CA anticipates that citizens of VWP countries who have the option of replacing their non-machine-readable passports with MRPs will likely do so instead of applying for an NIV, particularly in instances where the passport cost is significantly less than the $100 MRV fee. However, there are numerous situations where this may not be possible, and VWP nationals will need NIVs. Many expatriate VWP citizens may have passports issued abroad that are more likely to be non-machine-readable, and these expats often do not have the option of obtaining MRPs. Posts may therefore experience an increase in NIV applications from VWP citizens in the next few months. Many diplomatic and official passports currently valid for VWP travel are not machine-readable and the bearers will need a visa after October 1. Should VWP countries develop backlogs in the passport applications, some nationals may simply prefer applying for an NIV. Whenever appropriate, VWP nationals should be encouraged to apply for an MRP, but posts may not refuse to accept applications from VWP nationals who prefer obtaining an NIV.
Consular chiefs in VWP countries should ensure that appropriate host government officials are informed (text for VWP posts is being provided septel), and the travel industry (particularly the airlines) and media are appropriately informed. Posts in non-VWP countries, especially those where significant numbers of VWP country nationals reside, should contact embassies and consulates of VWP countries, as well as media and travel industry as appropriate. Posts’ outreach programs may draw on the following talking points:
– Beginning October 1, 2003, all citizens of countries participating in the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) who wish to enter the U.S. visa-free must present a machine-readable passport (MRP).
– VWP nationals who do not have MRPs must obtain a U.S. non-immigrant visa.
– This change affects only visa waiver travel. Applicants for visas at U.S. consular sections are not required to obtain MRPs, regardless of the category of visa being sought.
– Non-machine-readable passports will remain valid for Transit Without Visa (TWOV) purposes. TWOV and VWP are separate, distinct statuses. TWOV travelers are not admitted into the U.S. for B-visa purposes, as under the VWP, and therefore will not require an MRP. [note; TWOV was revoked last week]
– This change includes all categories of passports-- tourist, diplomatic, and official. Bearers of diplomatic and official passports that are not machine-readable will need visas beginning October 1, 2003.
[snip]
I’m not really in the mood to look up how long Ireland has issued MRPs, but I do know that whoever wrote the circular that went around my work a couple weeks ago seemed to think most people would have one.
Thank you Eva Luna.
It looks like it’s not quite as bad as I had thought.
I’m still a bit surprised that they pulled this through in the middle of summer. If there’s any time of the year when you don’t want to apply for a new passport it’s July/August.
Still, if that’s what it takes to keep the baddies out…