It it an actuality and not a not a technicality. The reasons remain the same as the last time you made the assertion. Also for the next time.
You've been heading toward the farthest boundary of good faith discussion for some time now. At this point, I think you are signaling that you have crossed it.
If the person had his visa cancelled, then the ideal way would have been to not let him on the plane at point of departure. As this didn't happen then the next location entry can be denied is at the border within the destination airport, and he was denied entry there. If you argue that he has landed, is on US soil, is handled by US law enforcement, then are you also saying that regardless of whether this person has a visa or not, he should be let assembled in the United States regardless of the visa status?
It it an actuality and not a not a technicality. The reasons remain the same as the last time you made the assertion. Also for the next time.
You've been heading toward the farthest boundary of good faith discussion for some time now. At this point, I think you are signaling that you have crossed it.
If the person had his visa cancelled, then the ideal way would have been to not let him on the plane at point of departure. As this didn't happen then the next location entry can be denied is at the border within the destination airport, and he was denied entry there. If you argue that he has landed, is on US soil, is handled by US law enforcement, then are you also saying that regardless of whether this person has a visa or not, he should be let assembled in the United States regardless of the visa status?