Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US Visa Forms DS-160, 260 Has Social Media Questions Now – Samples

redbus2us.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 91 posts

Re: US Visa Forms DS-160, 260 Has Social Media Questions Now – Samples

#71

Post by sgjohnson »

sgjohnson wrote: post #58
Someone1234 wrote: post #20

I literally could not fill this out without perjuring myself. They say you need to list even unknown/closed/deleted accounts for the last five years. I don't know them all. This either feels like an out of touch attempt by an older generation who doesn't understand social media (only uses Facebook, etc), or a huge honey trap tricking people into inadvertently "lying" to the USG. They can then use these mistakes to th…

>I literally could not fill this out without perjuring myself. Same. Thankfully both countries that I'm a national of are in ESTA program. On ESTA forms Social Media is an optional field.

Actually, 18 USC § 1621

> (2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true;

If you don't remember the handles, they have to prove that you didn't believe that you made a true declaration. Maybe putting a note of "Various other accounts on various platforms I cannot recall the usernames of" would address that? Not a lawyer.

That statute conveniently lets you forget things, just not blatantly lie. Had a twitter account a year ago that you forgot about? You could forget about it. Tweeted on it yesterday? Not so much.

It's an impossible case to prove, as the bar for perjury if not under oath is much higher. They have to prove that you didn't believe the stated information to be true.

Re: US Visa Forms DS-160, 260 Has Social Media Questions Now – Samples

#72

Post by gfaure »

josu wrote: post #14

The only silver lining is that they still have to ask. In the direction we are going, in a few years they will both know and have access to all your social media accounts.

It may well be that in many cases, they do already know, but are asking just so you have a chance to underreport.

Re: US Visa Forms DS-160, 260 Has Social Media Questions Now – Samples

#74

Post by pkaye »

wbl wrote: post #51
pkaye wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is more of a "perjury trap". If after admittance, they need a quick way to kick you out of the country they can dig into things and say you lied on the forms.

Why wouldn't you tell the truth?

For some things, if you tell the truth and something pops up you go into administrative limbo which could take a year to clear up due to backlog.

Re: US Visa Forms DS-160, 260 Has Social Media Questions Now – Samples

#75

Post by hannasanarion »

Arun2009 wrote: post #44

The US is well within its right to decide who should be allowed within its borders, but this requirement will drive away precisely the kind of immigrants that the US (or any other sensible country) might want to attract.

I'm sorry to inform you, but the people who currently run CBP are not only incompetent, but opposed to all immigrants regardless of qualification, especially if they're nonwhite.

Re: US Visa Forms DS-160, 260 Has Social Media Questions Now – Samples

#76

Post by NickNameNick »

roywiggins wrote: post #67
NickNameNick wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The yes/no section is weird: Were you a member of the Nazi party? Have you participated in a genocide, or attempted genocide? Have you attended a public school in the US as a foreigner after 199x, without paying?

The Nazi one has come in handy for deporting Nazis, even ones that managed to naturalize. It's easier to deport or denaturalize someone if they lied on their documents.

I have no objection to its presence on the form, except that it specifies a date range that ends before my parents were born.

The unpaid school one is an odd juxtaposition with the genocide, eugenics, and involuntary sterilisation questions that precede it.

Re: US Visa Forms DS-160, 260 Has Social Media Questions Now – Samples

#77

Post by conanbatt »

elliekelly wrote: post #17
conanbatt wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Foreigners do not have a right to free speech. It is a grave weakness in the American constitution that the rights of foreign nationals have not been declared or compared to the actual nationals. On this particular regard the Argentina constitution really upended the American one with its preamble declaring: this constitution is made to protect the liberties [...] of all those who wish to live in Argentinian soil.

> Foreigners do not have a right to free speech. This isn't really true. From wikipedia[1]: >> The government may not criminally punish immigrants based on speech that would be protected if said by a citizen. Non-citizens can be denied entry to the U.S. based on things they've said that, if said by a citizen/permanent resident, would be "protected" speech under the first amendment. (Which is why the government lookin…

> The government may not criminally punish immigrants based on speech that would be protected if said by a citizen. > Non-citizens can be denied entry to the U.S. based on things they've said that, if said by a citizen/permanent resident, would be "protected" speech under the first amendment.

Strange to me to draw this distinction. Denying entry is a prohibition exercised by the state. If you can be punished in any way, you don't have a right.

Re: US Visa Forms DS-160, 260 Has Social Media Questions Now – Samples

#78

Post by conanbatt »

phs318u wrote: post #16
conanbatt wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Foreigners do not have a right to free speech. It is a grave weakness in the American constitution that the rights of foreign nationals have not been declared or compared to the actual nationals. On this particular regard the Argentina constitution really upended the American one with its preamble declaring: this constitution is made to protect the liberties [...] of all those who wish to live in Argentinian soil.

> Foreigners do not have a right to free speech. I’m not sure if any more recent decisions or legislation has changed this, but according to this essay from 2015 [0], you’re probably wrong. [0] https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=19...

Those are people that are already in, not the people that are out. There's plenty you can't say as a foreigner on your way in that would be protected for a citizen.

Re: US Visa Forms DS-160, 260 Has Social Media Questions Now – Samples

#79

Post by conanbatt »

jkaplowitz wrote: post #15
conanbatt wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Foreigners do not have a right to free speech. It is a grave weakness in the American constitution that the rights of foreign nationals have not been declared or compared to the actual nationals. On this particular regard the Argentina constitution really upended the American one with its preamble declaring: this constitution is made to protect the liberties [...] of all those who wish to live in Argentinian soil.

Most rights in the US constitution, including the free speech right, apply to foreigners physically present within the US as well as to US citizens worldwide. I do wonder if those rights would apply to those foreigners who apply for a US visa while physically in the US (or who are there during the relevant processing stage). Possibly yes because of their location at the time, but possibly not since the visa is not fi…

> foreigners physically present

I agree that constitutional rights are conditional for foreigners.

Re: US Visa Forms DS-160, 260 Has Social Media Questions Now – Samples

#80

Post by conanbatt »

gruez wrote: post #41
Someone1234 wrote: post #20

I literally could not fill this out without perjuring myself. They say you need to list even unknown/closed/deleted accounts for the last five years. I don't know them all. This either feels like an out of touch attempt by an older generation who doesn't understand social media (only uses Facebook, etc), or a huge honey trap tricking people into inadvertently "lying" to the USG. They can then use these mistakes to th…

>a huge honey trap tricking people into inadvertently "lying" to the USG. They can then use these mistakes to then revoke anyone's status after the fact at a whim (inc. for political reasons). Doesn't the USG have to prove that you were lying in court? Or can they cite that your information is incorrect and immediately deport you?

Honestly: lol.

There is not right to entry even with an approved visa into the states. This could give someone the opportunity to find a reason to say no, which is totally within the rights of the official.

You can't sue the US government for denying you entry because you don't have a right to it.

Post reply on HN