I'm Peter Roberts, immigration attorney, who does work for YC and startups. AMA
335 comments
·May 16, 2025neom
There has been a bunch of chatter in Canadian founders whatsapp groups about people getting detained for long periods of time coming into the states either at SFO or pre-clear in Canada. Are you advising Canadians travel with any additional documentation these days?
__turbobrew__
Im a Canadian and go to the US for work fairly regularly. Something I didn’t realize is that the laws are different in preclearance areas. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-19.32/FullText.ht...
For example, you are allowed to withdraw your application to enter the US and leave the preclearance area. Additionally you are bound by different laws for search and siezure.
At this point I am only going to the US through preclearance areas because you are still on Canadian soil and bound by Canadian laws. That doesn’t necessarily mean that USBP won’t break those laws, but the Canadian courts get to decide if laws were broken instead of the US courts.
One thing I have not found a straight answer on yet is if USBP can compel you to unlock your electronic devices in a preclearance area. My current strategy is if I am asked to do that in preclearance I will withdraw my application to enter because Im not letting anyone access to my phone.
digianarchist
This is why I only fly back from Europe via Dublin international.
fakedang
And from Asia via Abu Dhabi.
jonny_eh
Can you be block-listed if you withdraw your application to enter?
__turbobrew__
I don’t know what the policy is, but you can be denied entry for any reason
KerrAvon
That’s only the Canada -> US leg, though. They can still grab your phone on the US -> Canada return trip, ne pas?
klipt
Historically the US has not had much "exit control".
For example leaving the Schengen area it's obligatory to go through "exit immigration" and get your passport stamped. Leaving the US, you show your passport to the airline, but usually there is no formal immigration check at all.
pyreko
I've crossed a few times between the two via plane since Feb and when exiting the US, they could not care less from my experience.
EDIT: I do remember hearing some cases of being searched when leaving through land borders, but that's more of cars being searched for smuggling IIRC?
__turbobrew__
Sure. Or USBP could just be waiting for you as your flight lands in the US and then immediately detain you. You have no rights in a US airport.
I have not ever heard of that happening, but if I did hear about it happening to normal people (i.e. people without a criminal warrant) I would probably stop going to the US.
chollida1
Where?
Driving across the border from the US back to Canada you don't talk to US border agents.
Flying from the US back to Canada you don't talk to US border agents.
proberts
There's no question that it's tougher now to get into the U.S., whether from Canada or another country via pre-clearance or via a land crossing, and there can be significant differences among airports and land crossings. Canadians are unique because they are visa exempt and CBP feels particularly emboldened to reassess their admissibility every time they enter. The keys are to avoid bad pre-clearance offices and land crossings and even more importantly to carry the right paperwork, which varies depending on the specific status being sought. There is also a huge difference between seeking entry as a visitor versus seeking entry as a worker with a visa, with the former much more challenging now.
Hexcles
Could you give some examples of "bad" pre-clearance offices?
ridgewell
The one that I frequently hear of as a layman (not a lawyer) is Toronto Pearson Airport's Preclearance, which has a very strict and narrow view of the TN Status eligible occupations.
neom
I was thinking just for folks going down regularly on a B1, do you think it's worth having a copy of your lease or rental agreement in Canada or something similar? It seems most of the stuff I was seeing is about Canadians establishing roots using a B1.
proberts
The concerns on the part of CBP when someone is seeking admission as a B-1 business visitor are the appropriateness of the applicant's proposed activities and the applicant's ties to home/intent to return home (Canada). So you want to keep in your back pocket documents that address these concerns, such as a foreign lease agreement, foreign pay statement, and evidence of the purpose, such as a printout of the conference being attended or a letter of invitation. It's also really important to be prepared to provide specifics about your purpose, who, what, when, and where.
jerryseff
Well yeah, it's because canadian "founders" have a ripe reputation of working in the U.S. while on visitor visas...
__turbobrew__
If you are a Canadian citizen you don’t need a visa — due to the visa waiver program — for business purposes as long as your stay is less than 90 days.
You cannot be employed in the US under these conditions, but as a founder you are most likely doing things which are permitted:
* negotiating contracts * business meetings * board meetings * conferences * purchasing property in the US
stainforth
"Founders" seems like an arbitrary term devised
reposefulcats
Hi Peter, I am a naturalized US citizen (via employment sponsored H1B to Green Card route). Prior to obtaining my citizenship I held an F1 visa to complete my PhD, and may have overstayed in the US at the end of my studies (I am not sure, this was 15+ years ago). This was never raised as an issue when I applied for my H1B, Green Card or citizenship, but is it something that could become an issue for me now if I travel as a US citizen and attempt to return to the US? Is there anything I can do proactively to address this if it is likely to be a problem? Thank you.
proberts
Almost certainly, even if you did overstay, it's not an issue but for peace of mind, you should speak with an attorney because it sounds like you didn't overstay in a way that would have impacted your H-1B, green card, or citizenship applications. (F-1 students are admitted until D/S - duration of status - so they almost never considered overstays.)
AndrzejNowak
If an individual is transgender, not a US citizen, and has a passport with an updated gender marker (or X), can they still get a visa? Or is submitting an official document with "wrong information" enough for a refusal?
What about existing visas?
proberts
The short answer is Yes, this individual can still get a U.S. visa. But I'd still recommend that this person speak with an attorney before applying for a visa or traveling to the U.S.
kreeWall
Hi Peter, thank you so much for doing this AMA! I'm currently trying to decide whether to appeal an EB1A decision - they agreed to meeting "plain language" for 3 criteria, but denied the application on final merit.
What kind of considerations would you advise your clients to think of when making this decision?
WaxProlix
Appreciate the AMA. I'm curious about options for transitioning employees from the temporary (and now at-risk) Uniting for Ukraine parole status to something more stable and long term.
Is H1B lottery just going to be a Ukrainian's best bet? A lot of the advice and documentation seems contradictory, as 'parole' seems in some ways to be more a lack of status than a status itself. Leave the country and apply for some other type of more permanent work visa?
proberts
The task is to find another type of work visa, which would require departure at some point but this could be to countries other than Ukraine. For most Ukrainians, the visa options are going to limited to the regular H-1B, the cap-exempt H-1B, and the O-1.
redbell
All past Peter's AMA discussions:
https://hn.algolia.com/?query=I%27m%20Peter%20Roberts%2C%20i...
joshdavham
I'm a Canadian software developer who'd like to join an American startup so naturally I've been applying to a bunch of jobs. More specifically, I'm looking to go with TN visa.
In most job applications, I need to answer the two following questions 1) Are you legally authorized to work in the US? and 2) Will you now or in the future require sponsorship? I'm looking for advice on how I should be answering these questions.
For example, I believe I should technically be answering NO to 1) and YES to 2), but I'm slightly unsure about this.
I've heard recently that some Canadians actually recommend answering YES to 1) as getting a TN visa is very simple and not too much harder than just hiring an American. The idea is that when you answer NO to 1) that recruiters (and especially startups who are often more naive about visas) will lump you in as being hard to hire like immigrants who come to the US on the H1B and then filter out your application.
As for question 2), because the TN is a "Nonimmigrant" visa, does this technically mean I can answer NO here?
Basically in summary, how would you recommend I answer these questions? I don't want my applications to get auto filtered, but I'd also like to be as honest as possible.
xp84
Hi, I just spent 2 months interviewing and hiring candidates for 4 open (remote) eng positions at a US startup. Answering "Yes" to 1 when you don't have a green card or US citizenship would be a way to guarantee that I would rescind your offer and make a mental note to never trust you. I don't think you should do that.
We actually hired some Canadian talent -- we just used an EOR in Canada. The EOR cost us about $600 a month per head as their cut, but it was worth it to get the excellent developers we have through that deal.
The reason why some/many firms would filter out anyone saying NO to (1) is that getting a visa sponsored requires significant work of a specialized nature and our company certainly is not equipped to do that because we don't have people who have the time and skills to deal with the insane demands of our government to obtain the necessary document (This is not a new or partisan issue btw, I remember losing a great developer in the Obama years due to the feds giving her the run-around).
jgilias
If those are remote positions, why do you care about any of this at all? Make it clear that the applicant needs to handle taxation in their home country themselves, and that’s that. I know many software engineers working remotely for companies outside their home country. One would typically set up an LLC or equivalent, and be employed by that.
Any options agreement would be with the private individual to not mess up the cap table.
null
YZF
TN is not a visa and all you need to get this status is a job offer. There's really no work of any specialized nature but some companies do get legal advice to help streamline the process and get better outcomes like reducing the probability that the person would be denied.
(EDIT: it is sometimes referred to a visa and sometimes as a status but at any rate as someone who had TN status with two different US startups there was very little process around it)
xp84
Brief reading of reddit posts by people who actually did this almost always included that the company's lawyers wrote them letters and prepared packets of materials for them to provide CBP. We don't have any lawyers. We're simply not employing people who don't have green cards. We don't have time or money to play games with the government.
One important thing in seeking TN status is that the title of degree matters immensely to your employability, which goes entirely against what I stand for, as if you have a degree in economics or no degree but do a great job of writing code, I'd want to hire you. The law contains vagaries and there is a "memo" which suggests that they use common sense, but it's all up to a random border guard who might not know any of that to interpret everything.
Anyway, you're not automatically legally allowed to work in the US and lying about it won't help. We can agree to disagree on whether we "should" deal with all that stuff or if we're missing out, but lying to get halfway in the door is the worst way to change an employer's mind, especially in this economy when plenty of domestic candidates are available.
hn_throwaway_99
The US State Department literally calls it a visa, I'd trust them before I trust random Internet commenters: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/employme...
bcoates
Wow, you're real proud of not understanding what a TN visa is or how to do the most basic of HR functions.
You’re doing anyone you don't give a job a favor.
Plasmoid
> Answering "Yes" to 1 when you don't have a green card or US citizenship would be a way to guarantee that I would rescind your offer
This might actually violate EEOC. You would discriminating on the basis on nationality. The question that was asked was "Are you legally authorized to work in the US?" and Canadian have a limited legal right to work in the US under NAFTA.
hn_throwaway_99
> This might actually violate EEOC. You would discriminating on the basis on nationality.
This is laughably incorrect, and a good example of why you should get legal advice from lawyers instead of Internet forums.
_bin_
The question is usually understood to mean "on an ongoing basis" and it's essentially lying. The system may not be correct or kind, but I'd have a lot of trouble trusting someone whose response to "the system isn't fair" is "I'll lie to get around it and achieve the outcome I believe is right" enough to hire him.
YZF
They're not allowed to work unless they have TN status. I agree with the OP that replying YES is dishonest.
oldpersonintx
[dead]
jsbg
> Answering "Yes" to 1 when you don't have a green card or US citizenship would be a way to guarantee that I would rescind your offer and make a mental note to never trust you.
I wouldn't trust you either. The question is ambiguous when it comes to NAFTA and applicants are worried about being filtered out despite not needing visa sponsorship. TN is not a visa it's a status based on a free trade agreement.
hn_throwaway_99
Ugh, arguing over the simple meaning of factual statements on the Internet is my biggest pet peeve. If you don't have an appropriate work visa, permanent residency or citizenship, and you answer yes to the question of "Are you legally authorized to work in the US", you are just a liar, plain and simple.
proberts
Legally, the correct answers are No and Yes.
jsbg
Can you expand on that? TN does not require sponsorship even though most companies do agree to pay an immigration firm to help the applicant.
1659447091
I think It's not sponsorship in terms of what you hear about for h1b. But if you need a "Job Offer" before getting a TN (as someone upthread mentioned) that itself is a form of sponsorship, since you still need something from that company before you can work.
Plasmoid
That's really interesting. Can you expand on why those are the correct answers?
noodlesUK
Thanks for doing the AMA!
I'm a US citizen born abroad - I got my citizenship via (I believe) INA 320 when I was a child. I have a US-born father who was not eligible to pass on his citizenship at the time of my birth. I lived in the US for most of my childhood up until ~2015 (initially as an LPR), and at some point, I obtained a US passport.
I don't have a certificate of citizenship, only a US passport. Given the way the US is going, I'm concerned that one day I'm going to apply renew my passport or otherwise have to prove my citizenship, and I'm not going to be able to sufficiently document it. Is this a real risk? Would you advise applying for a CoC in my circumstances? Am I even eligible to apply for one given that I live abroad? What other steps if any should I take to protect my status?
proberts
You still can apply for a Certificate of Citizenship but there's a cost associated with it and I really don't think it's necessary or even advisable because you are now giving the government a chance to reassess its previous approval. A U.S. passport is always considered sufficient evidence of U.S. citizenship.
noodlesUK
Thanks. I guess that’s a valid point - why invite unnecessary scrutiny.
Terr_
Especially since the current administration seems to be, er, indiscriminately grasping at low-hanging fruit make some kind of unofficial quota.
If good documentation and good behavior won't protect you, then that leaves trying to avoid being in the front page of search results.
johnisgood
This is a really good advice, actually.
dyauspitr
What do you mean by a US born father not eligible to pass on his citizenship?
noodlesUK
In order for U.S. citizens to pass on their citizenship to children born abroad, they need to have resided in the U.S. for a certain period prior to the birth of the child.
The amount of time the parent has to have lived in the U.S. varies but usually it’s 5 years with at least 2 years after the age of 14.
If they don’t automatically pass it on and they want to move back to the U.S., they need to apply for green cards for their kids.
Since 2001, anyone under 18 who has a green card and lives with a U.S. citizen parent becomes a citizen automatically by process of law, under INA 320. Unfortunately documenting this is not automatic. A lot of people who came before 2001 don’t even know that they’re citizens. The application for a certificate costs a lot of money, so often parents tend to skip it if they don’t feel it’s necessary.
See below for the residency criteria.
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/travel-lega...
INA 320: https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-12-part-h-chapter...
miotintherain
Hi Peter, thanks for doing this AMA.
I am traveling to the US soon for work from Europe. I have been reading a lot of articles about detentions at US airports and phone checks. My mindset has always been to never give my personal phone for an inspection, but times has changed now and it has been happening a lot more frequently. I am wondering what is the best course of action, prior to travel and if asked to give your phone and password. Also, what happens if you refuse to do so? Is the worst case scenario that they will send you back to where you came from?
BeetleB
Not a lawer, but the ACLU has a page on this:
Short FAQ:
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/what-do-when-encounter...
Dedicated article:
https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/can-border-agen...
proberts
Thank you. This is excellent guidance.
mandeepj
from [1]:
> Refusal to do so might lead to delay, additional questioning, and/or officers seizing your device for further inspection.
Then, there's no point in denying device search?
[1]: https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/what-do-when-encounter...
ty6853
Not legal advice but I'm a US citizen and when I've refused to answer their intrusive questions the worst that has happened to me is they imprisoned me, stripped me naked and searched me, got a fraudulent warrant for an internal body search, and then sent me the bill after dumping me at the border when they found nothing.
Enjoy.
Exoristos
Can you explain what fraud was used to obtain the warrant?
ty6853
Yes.
They claimed a dog alerted on me. An anonymous dog, handled by an unnamed officer in the affidavit, which was used as 3rd party inter-species hearsay via a HSI officer to the assistant attorney and judge.
A dog did not alert on me. In fact it is against CBP policy to use dogs on a person, they are to be used on your articles.
proberts
The short answer is that CBP has the right to ask to see your electronic devices and you have the right to refuse but if you refuse (and you are not a U.S. green card holder or citizen), CBP likely will deny you admission and send you home.
deadbabe
I had a friend who was asked to unlock her phone, and she did, and then… they did nothing. They watched her do it and moved on to the next question.
Seems like asking someone to do this is just a good test to see the kind of individual they’re dealing with. It’s not practical to thoroughly search phones at scale and plus they know people can just have burner phones anyway. If you’re cagey and combative they know you’re a problem.
mrguyorama
It's CBP
It's not actually about any form of screening. It's a power trip. Only the dumbest criminal or terrorist would bring an incriminating device across the border and have any need to say "no" to that request.
Which, stopping dumb criminals and terrorists is important and valuable and they do exist, but nobody applied to work for CBP in order to check the phones of dumb criminals. They applied because they have strong opinions about certain things.
mandeepj
> My mindset has always been to never give my personal phone for an inspection
Get a burner phone! Upload your entire data to the cloud as well. Either you can store your phone in the check-in luggage or restore your data once you've arrived at your US location.
david422
I'm wondering if anyone uses burner phones. I have an old phone, and a second phone number that I got from Tello for $5 a month, intending to use it for a business number, but then never did. It's currently completely detached from anything personal and I figure if I do need to go over the border I could just use that still for any communication and internet access, but personal details would be at a very bare minimum.
fucalost
For what it’s worth, I recently travelled to the US from the Middle East (into Houston) and was also concerned about this.
My solution was to delete apps I didn’t want to be searched (e.g. WhatsApp) after having made a cloud backup, then enabling airplane mode.
CBP’s website [1] states:
> Prior to beginning a basic or advanced search, CBP Officers will ensure all data and network connections are disabled
And no, I wasn’t searched (thankfully!)
[1] https://www.cbp.gov/travel/cbp-search-authority/border-searc...
briandear
> it has been happening a lot more frequently.
Is that factual? Or has the media simply been covering it more due to their bias?
International Travelers Processed with Electronic Device Search
Fiscal Year Quarter Total Border Searches Conducted FY 24, Q1 10,937 FY24, Q2 11,273 FY24, Q3 12,090 FY24, Q4 12,658 FY25, Q1 12,092 FY25, Q2 12,260
(The U.S. 2024 fiscal year began on September 28, 2023)
To understand the scale, in FY25 Q2, there were 88 million entries.
So the assertion that 1) electronic searches are statistically meaningful and 2) they are increasing by any significance is just media-fed fear.
One ought to consider the UK’s Terrorism Act of 2000 — the police do not even need reasonable suspicion of a crime to stop and search a person, their vehicle, or electronic devices. https://www.hrw.org/report/2010/07/04/without-suspicion/stop...
You can also be arrested in the UK for the crime of insulting someone. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18102815.amp
belorn
For any electronic device it is advisable to take a complete backup of the unit, store an encrypted version somewhere online, and then restore the device to factory reset. Do not log in to any account that you wouldn't feel perfectly fine giving up in an inspection.
They can already hijack any phone number, so the only vulnerability you are giving up by crossing the border is the files, call log/sms, and accounts you bring with you.
hdivider
Are you seeing any changes in the difficulty of the EB1A, or is it about the same as in the previous administration?
OnionBlender
Have people gotten into trouble for having a nearly empty phone when they get searched? Like using a burner phone or doing a factory reset prior to the trip. I've wondered if that would be considered suspecious.
onepremise
Hey Peter, what are your thoughts on networks states and the methods tech CEOS and VCs are using to push the working class towards Techno feudalism? Do you think Peter Thiel using Palantir to mine US tax payers information, to help drive and target innocent civilians towards their vision, is legal? Should the constitution exist or do we need to be conquered and lead by monarchies? Most importantly, do you believe the supreme court should exist to serve its purpose in our system of checks and balances?
briandear
I’m sorry, I have no idea what you’re going on about. Help me understand how this pertains to immigration.
onepremise
Certainly :) Immigration is actually directly related to how CEOs and VC intend to change the landscape for all things government related, and democracy as a whole. There is very much a subjective intent to tear down the rule of law, the rights that safeguard Americans as a whole, starting with immigration. IT's an entry point, a target to whittle away basic rights of the average American. Peter Thiel touches on this need for a tech revolution in his paper "The Straussian Moment", https://www.hoover.org/research/peter-thiel-straussian-momen..., who also funded JD Vance's rise to VP. These guys love the concepts written in Sirrivassan's book "the Network State", and want to replace our current government with distributed monarchies. Sirrivassan, Thiel, Andresen, and Curtis Yarvin actually have a documented plan to achieve this which is being executed, to a "T", which involves attacking immigration, not just as a distraction so they can attack the courts directly, but also cause it's part of their vision. Curtis Yarvin's writings include pointed attacks on immigration, both as a policy and as a reflection of deeper systemic problems. He uses immigration as an example to argue for the failure of democracy and to advocate for his preferred model of authoritarian governance. He also frames immigration debates as distractions from what he sees as the real issues-namely, the incompetence and self-serving nature of current elites and institutions.
I'll be here for the next 5-6 hours. As usual, there are countless topics given the rapidly changing immigration landscape and I'll be guided by whatever you're concerned with. Please remember that I can't provide legal advice on specific cases because I won't have access to all the facts. Please stick to a factual discussion in your questions and I'll try to do the same in my answers.
Edit: I am taking a break now and will return later this afternoon/evening to respond to any comments and answer any questions. Thank you everyone for a great and engaged AMA so far.