FURTHER CBP INSPECTION AT A PORT OF ENTRY
Referral to secondary inspection does not itself mean that a traveler is inadmissible. It allows CBP to conduct further review of identity, documents, immigration history, purpose of travel or other issues before deciding whether the traveler may enter.
CBP describes primary inspection as the initial inspection of arriving travelers. A traveler whose processing requires more time or whose case warrants further review may be referred to secondary inspection.
CBP states that officers have broad discretion to make a secondary referral, including referrals made without suspicion of wrongdoing.
Secondary inspection is not itself a finding of inadmissibility. It is a further inspection process that may end in admission, withdrawal, expedited removal or another disposition.
A referral therefore does not necessarily mean that CBP has already decided the traveler did something wrong.
In a visitor case, officers may focus on the purpose and duration of travel, employment, finances, U.S. relationships, prior trips and whether the traveler intends to comply with the temporary visa classification.
Statements made during secondary inspection can later become important if CBP alleges that the traveler misrepresented the purpose of travel or another material fact.
CBP maintains a separate border-search policy for electronic devices. Current CBP public guidance explains that electronic-device searches are only a small fraction of secondary inspections, but they can occur at the border.
Information located during such a search may become relevant to a traveler’s stated purpose, employment, relationships or other admissibility questions.
An electronic-device search is not automatic in secondary inspection. CBP’s current statistics show that most travelers referred to secondary do not have an electronic device searched.
The inspection can generate government records that may be available to CBP in future immigration encounters.
No. Many travelers are admitted after secondary inspection. Visa cancellation depends on the actual outcome.
Yes, in a case covered by the expedited-removal statute and regulations.
Often yes when the traveler does not possess the complete record or needs to understand the factual and legal findings before applying again.
These government materials provide the principal statutory, regulatory or agency framework discussed on this page.
A review can identify whether the encounter ended in admission, withdrawal, removal, visa cancellation or a separate inadmissibility finding.