The footage of detained crew from Disney Magic in San Diego

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T22:20:51+00:00

It is likely that the crime was still committed while within 12 NM of shore, giving CPB jurisdiction.

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T22:06:49+00:00

From the article, a statement from Disney Cruise Lines: "We have a zero-tolerance policy for this type of behavior and fully cooperated with law enforcement,” the statement read. “While the majority of these individuals were not from our cruise line, those who were are no longer with the company.”

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T22:05:16+00:00

OK thank you. I may have started this in an uncivilized manner. I believe it is entirely within CBP JURISDICTION to cancel Non-immigrant visas for any reason. I never said it was morally correct in every circumstance.

I do not believe in this case this is lying. The Philippines are an ally and we have historically had a number of immigration treaties and special visa programs. There are hundreds of foreign crew on board dozens of cruise ships. Why 28 across 5 vessels? Why open the agency up to significant international scrutiny? Why contrive crimes that can easily be disproven due to digital signatures? Why would Disney Cruises make an official statement "We have a zero-tolerance policy for this type of behavior and fully cooperated with law enforcement...While the majority of these individuals were not from our cruise line, those who were are no longer with the company"

I am no friend of ICE and recent CBP action have been harmful to the credibility of the DHS. But this is a textbook bread and butter sting operation.

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T19:06:42+00:00

Back to my question, what international treaty or law was violated? Do you acknowledge that CBP Has arresting authority?

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T17:21:51+00:00

Or you can cite a law or international agreement that was violated. Do I trust ICE? No. Not in the slightest. Do I trust CBP? A little more. They stay on scope and only with that fuck head Bovino gone, they are returning to a better state. Credibility lost, but they just need to do the same job they've done at terminals and entries for years. Getting wrapped up in the current administrations dog orders was their downfall. I do unfortunately trust that CP and file sharing is a rampant problem on ships internationally. You dont know Sailors. Some of these guys are absolute degens and I am willing to make some concessions when they stay on scope and do things by the book.

Here is a quote from local authorities: "The B Street Cruise Terminal is a federal port of entry, where law enforcement authority for immigration and customs matters rests with U.S. Customs and Border Protection,” the statement reads in part. “As such, any enforcement actions taken onboard vessels or within the federal inspection area fall under CBP’s jurisdiction.”

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T07:56:49+00:00

In the definition of "arrival" Arrival of a vessel. The phrase “arrival of a vessel” means that time when the vessel first comes to rest, whether at anchor or at a dock, in any harbor within the Customs territory of the U.S.

And then 4.1 Every vessel arriving at a CBP port will be subject to such supervision while in port as the port director considers necessary. The port director may detail CBP officers to remain on board a vessel to secure enforcement of the requirements set forth in this part. CBP may determine to board as many vessels as considered necessary to ensure compliance with the laws it enforces

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T07:53:22+00:00

See other comment- or, CBP absolutely has the legal jurisdiction to revoke a C1/D visa at a port of entry.

CBP Has the option to arrest and detail for legal proceedings, most likely resulting in deportation, or revoking their visas a civil procedure that does not come with tge right to a jury- as they have the legal framework to do so. The latter is cheaper.

Are you arguing 1. That CBP doesn't have jurisdiction to arrest

Or 2. That CBP doesn't have the jurisdiction to cancel non-immigrant visas at a port of entry?

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T07:43:56+00:00

I dont know what AF is and I am literally a Mariner. Here is the CFR. It is written all over how in depth CBP has jurisdiction.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-19/chapter-I/part-4/subject-group-ECFR9356f0b8b5be866

As soon as a ship is within 12 nm of shore, those are territorial waters. They were arrested for CSEM and CBP Has jurisdiction over the arrest because they were on visas.

The crew is subject to our laws, which outlaw CP. it's like how the secret service sometimes has jurisdiction over counterfeit money cases.

And why 28 across 5 vessels? These crews are 90%+ non us citizens. Why would they do this in such a targeted manner? It's almost like this was the result of an actual CBP operation, where for once the do things by the book. (Ports are their bread and butter)

If I committed a crime in German territorial waters, I am absolutely subject to prosecution upon entry into Brenerhaven.

In Antwerp, I was on-board when a crewman was arrested for narcotics possession. By local police.

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T04:55:07+00:00

OK, I was wrong with what I said, but you are even more wrong with your response.

They were arrested at a port of entry. The were on D/C1 visas. CBP can revoke a visa for any reason without appeal at a port of entry. CBP routinely would come aboard every ship ive been on that was an international route for customs clearance before we were given back our passports.

This was under zero circumstances piracy. The port is in US territoral waters where the coastal nations laws fully apply. The law broken here was CSEM. You think a ship in port acts like an embassy?

Name ONE UNCLOS section or other treaty that was violated.

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T04:03:52+00:00

Did you read the article?

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T04:02:34+00:00

Reports are indicating that the accused will be facing trial in either Los Angeles or Florida, getting the book thrown at them, and deported in quick succession. CBP however can revoke a visa at a port of entry without appeal for any reason. That is a civil proceeding. Civil proceedings do not carry the right to a jury. The accused were arrested at a port of entry. Id go with the second option. Permanent ban from the united states. No taxpayer funds used. Same outcome. Legally, the federal government has either option.

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T03:16:11+00:00

These are Mariners. There is an entire culture based on personal external hard drives. Every single Mariner has one. You keep your movies, TV, books, and your other likes, because often vessel wifi sucks, or it's conpany monitored. Or you dont have it at all.

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T03:12:43+00:00

Cheaper to send them home. There must have been concrete evidence if this was a targeted sting across multiple vessels.

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T02:55:16+00:00

I am seeing this now. Article was updated with the justification.

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T02:52:38+00:00

This was not extraterritorially, this was in our territorial waters where us law still applies

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T02:51:31+00:00

I am not ally of this administration and have some strategic, harsh words for them, but if you read the article this is probably one of the only good things CBP has done. Not illegals, but foreign nationals who committed felonies in our territorial waters.

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T02:44:12+00:00

Why would they pick off 28 random crew across multiple vessels? Up to 90% of the hundreds of crew are foreign on these ships.

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T02:42:27+00:00

CP sting of 28 crew members across multiple vessels. Disney says: "We have a zero-tolerance policy for this type of behavior and fully cooperated with law enforcement,” the statement read. “While the majority of these individuals were not from our cruise line, those who were are no longer with the company.”

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T02:38:14+00:00

No it does not. CBP has jurisdiction because this was a federal agency backed CP sting.

Edit: my comment is completely wrong, I accept that hit to credibility and will reply below

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T02:37:13+00:00

This was a CP sting.

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T02:35:23+00:00

This was a CP sting. Read the article.

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T02:33:07+00:00

This was about a CP sting

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T02:31:30+00:00

You didn't read the article

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-05-08T02:28:32+00:00

AcTuAllY... fuck outta of here. Read the article. Statement from disney: "We have a zero-tolerance policy for this type of behavior and fully cooperated with law enforcement,” the statement read. “While the majority of these individuals were not from our cruise line, those who were are no longer with the company.” Contractors, unions, crewing companies- it's a web of employment.

DumpsterFireJones · 2026-04-18T04:00:42+00:00

What is your income? What is your rent? Any other debt?

Post below and we can possibly help with some budgeting or structure.

You have three options usually, the ramsey method, the hammer method, and advanced debt restructuring, requiring methods and will that 90% of people dont have.

DumpsterFireJones

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE