[rdtsc]

That's a pretty good description of what happens at most airports I've been through.

> So none of this sounds too unusual to me, except for the final step: being shipped off to a detention center.

It's because her J-1 visa was cancelled. I am not sure if that was warranted or how threatening frog embryos are, so can't judge there. But if the J-1 visa is cancelled, the person usually has to exit the US and re-apply. She didn't necessarily lose her status as a J-1 student, but she may need a new visa. So the procedure here would have been to put her on a plane to Russia. However they asked her if it would be dangerous for her to be there, and it is, so she got sent to a detention center instead.

[fc417fc802]

It's worth considering how remarkably broken that system is. The end result is detention or deportation of a highly skilled professional with ongoing employment in the US. That's not someone who would typically be considered a flight risk or an overstay risk.

Requiring one to return home to reapply also never made any sense for student visas, at least when it comes to graduate level research. Academics at state funded institutions who are paid off of government grants aren't generally people you need to worry about sticking around if their visa is denied. Neither is it clear why you would ever want to deny a visa to such a person to begin with.

[rdtsc]

> The end result is detention or deportation of a highly skilled professional with ongoing employment in the US.

Agree. However, this kind of visa is not necessarily for highly skilled professionals, it can be for general cultural exchange, even for au pairs. They have to be "sponsored" by someone. As such, it can also be a vehicle to get people in the country and overstay the visa, I know someone who did that. Then, once it's cancelled, the general rule is you can't enter into the country. To a port of entry person a J-1 for a nanny for a rich family is just as good as J-1 for a Harvard researcher. Except the Harvard researcher now did break some rule so is in a much worse position.

> at least when it comes to graduate level research.

Most definitely. There should be someone looking here and saying maybe these should different visa types and the requirement to leave sounds excessive. It shouldn't be the default, I think. Maybe with the most visible cases like these, there is more of a chance to change the rules.

> Neither is it clear why you would ever want to deny a visa to such a person to begin with.

They broke a rule or law and seemingly tried to hide it. At that point I guess it depends on the mood of the person at the port of entry. It shouldn't be like that but it is. There is no general right to have a visa or some way to compel the US government to give you one. A lawyer through a court could make a case here. But in general you can't show up and say "You owe me a J-1 visa" or "you'll un-cancel the previous one".