> CBP agents at the border accused Brösche of planning to violate the terms of the visa waiver program by intending to work as a tattoo artist during her trip to LA, Lofving said.
This seems to be key point - but sounds awfully subjective if you can just be accused. Did she bring her tattoo equipment or something? I mean a person could type or code on a laptop too for work...
Edit: yes, apparently:
> According to Lofving, Brösche had equipment on her that she used for tattooing, and this may have been part of the reason for her detention.
The article I read a few days ago said that the tattoo artist posted on Instagram advertising their arrival to the US and taking clients. They had done the same with the previous destination on their tour.
If it's true, it seems pretty open and shut, so I'm not really sure why this is popping up on HN now.
It doesn’t seem open and shut at all, why not just deny her entry if they’re so sure at the border? It’s popping up on HN because apparently she’s been detained for over a month… well after her scheduled return flight. why would this ever be necessary?
I don’t know why this is on HN either but even if it is true, why detain for her so long? Why let her in at all? If it’s “open and shut” why hasn’t it been shut? Why is she still here?
This seems to be key point - but sounds awfully subjective if you can just be accused. Did she bring her tattoo equipment or something? I mean a person could type or code on a laptop too for work...
Edit: yes, apparently:
> According to Lofving, Brösche had equipment on her that she used for tattooing, and this may have been part of the reason for her detention.
https://www.tag24.com/lifestyle/tattoos/vacationing-tattoo-a...
Still seems a dumb criteria.