Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities

[Melinda Shore <[e-mail]>]

On 4/4/17 3:34 PM, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
> At least once, I was questioned extensively when going from the US to a
> meeting in Canada. I had to show evidence of the meeting and my
> itinerary and convince them that I wasn’t entering Canada to take work
> away from a Canadian. That said, I still support holding meetings in Canada.

That's not comparable.  We know what the policy is concerning
Americans working in Canada, and that how you describe "meeting"
can affect whether or not it's considered to be work.  People
without the appropriate papers (whether it's citizenship, residence,
or a visa) are not permitted to work in Canada, period.  You should
know that before entering Canada.  (That said, I'm truly sorry you were
asked for evidence supporting the reason you gave for entering the
country).

Here, we're talking about uncertainty about whether or not Canadian
citizens (for example) will be permitted to enter the US based on
religious beliefs or (in the case of naturalized citizens) country of
birth.  Sometimes they are, sometimes they're not, and it appears to be
independent of any publicly-announced policy.  Similarly, US citizens
do not have the right to enter the US (that's not that widely-known,
unfortunately) and some citizens and green card holders have been
turned away or detained when trying to re-enter the US because of
their religion or country of birth.  This is not comparable to a
situation in which someone trying to enter a country is asked to
provide evidence supporting their assertions about why they're entering.

Melinda