US Immigration and Customs in Brooklyn

[bluemarble]

I noticed this information in the QM2 Daily Programme delivered to our cabin this evening. This looks like it could be a welcome change to US Customs and Border Protection procedures in Brooklyn for guests who would prefer to remain on board before returning to Southampton (emphasis in red mine).

 

 

"U.S. Immigration and Customs Formalities

 

On the morning of our arrival at Brooklyn Cruise Terminal, US Customs and Border Protection will be inspecting all guests disembarking Queen Mary 2, in-transit guests on organized shore experiences and guests who are planning to go ashore independently, regardless of nationality. The inspection will be carried out in the terminal building. Guests are kindly requested to follow the immigration instructions that were delivered to your stateroom.

 

Disembarking Guests
After you have disembarked Queen Mary 2, please collect your luggage from the baggage hall and then proceed through the immigration inspection and clear customs.

 

Guests continuing their voyage with us to Southampton
1. Guests who do not wish to go ashore in New York are NOT required to attend the inspection in the Terminal.
2. Guests on organized shore experiences and guests who are planning to go ashore independently in New York are required to attend this Immigration and Customs inspection. Please ensure to proceed ashore before 10:30am."

[Underwatr]

I'll be interested in how that will be executed. Previously one could leave the ship (briefly) after embarkation and return but it appears that the new method will preclude anyone from leaving the ship before sailaway. Otherwise a passenger could conceivably evade Immigration inspection.

[ace2542]

4 hours ago, Underwatr said:

I'll be interested in how that will be executed. Previously one could leave the ship (briefly) after embarkation and return but it appears that the new method will preclude anyone from leaving the ship before sailaway. Otherwise a passenger could conceivably evade Immigration inspection.

This also interestingly allows passenger who are banned from the USA for some reason to travel on QM2 on the T/A when previously they could not do so to my knowledge. And as you say no way for a passenger to slip ashore perhaps one who is banned from America?

Edited December 2, 2022 by ace2542

[ace2542]

Does this mean that passenger will no longer need the ESTA if not U.S Citizens? After all you don't need one to travel over the USA to Mexico for instance

[Host Hattie]

2 hours ago, ace2542 said:

This also interestingly allows passenger who are banned from the USA for some reason to travel on QM2 on the T/A when previously they could not do so to my knowledge. And as you say no way for a passenger to slip ashore perhaps one who is banned from America?

The current cruise is a New York round-trip to the Caribbean.  I don't think we can assume that the same process will be in place for a crossing. 

Thanks for the update @bluemarble.

[ballroom-cruisers]

This sounds like a very welcome change in policy by US Customs and Border Protection - and a very significant departure from the previous policy for many years of 'zeroing' any ship that arrives at a US port. I, and no doubt many others, will be very interested in hearing how this works out in the real situation when passengers who don't wish to step on American soil on a back to back voyage (or onward to non-US countries), when arriving in New York, actually works out.  If it is as many would hope, then Cunard may well end up with a useful increase in the numbers being prepared to book TA voyages, and particularly those who want to enjoy westbound then eastbound crossings.

[ace2542]

2 hours ago, Host Hattie said:

The current cruise is a New York round-trip to the Caribbean.  I don't think we can assume that the same process will be in place for a crossing. 

Thanks for the update @bluemarble.

If that crossing is B2B then what is the difference? And will they repeat this process when the ship comes back to Brooklyn for the Soton leg on December 8th?

Edited December 2, 2022 by ace2542

[ace2542]

2 hours ago, ballroom-cruisers said:

This sounds like a very welcome change in policy by US Customs and Border Protection - and a very significant departure from the previous policy for many years of 'zeroing' any ship that arrives at a US port. I, and no doubt many others, will be very interested in hearing how this works out in the real situation when passengers who don't wish to step on American soil on a back to back voyage (or onward to non-US countries), when arriving in New York, actually works out.  If it is as many would hope, then Cunard may well end up with a useful increase in the numbers being prepared to book TA voyages, and particularly those who want to enjoy westbound then eastbound crossings.

It will also if it is what you think it is allow people to live on the QM2 particuarly Brits if they wish to do so a lot easier than previously. And as I have said this could also allow people who are banned from the USA for whatever reason to partake in the QM2 and other cruises for that matter. A world cruise or Caribbean cruise. After all being banned from the U.S means you can't cruise a third of the world. At least not very easily.

[Victoria2]

37 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

It will also if it is what you think it is allow people to live on the QM2 particuarly Brits if they wish to do so a lot easier than previously. And as I have said this could also allow people who are banned from the USA for whatever reason to partake in the QM2 and other cruises for that matter. A world cruise or Caribbean cruise. After all being banned from the U.S means you can't cruise a third of the world. At least not very easily.

I don't think you can automatically assume an ESTA isn't required to board the ship if destined for a US port. All this directive seems to be saying is if a passenger doesn't want to leave the ship when in this particular US port, and on this particular itinerary, then they don't have to disembark for immigration purposes.

 

It gives no information as to subsequent QM2  travel.

[TheOldBear]

2 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

I don't think you can automatically assume an ESTA isn't required to board the ship if destined for a US port. All this directive seems to be saying is if a passenger doesn't want to leave the ship when in this particular US port, and on this particular itinerary, then they don't have to disembark for immigration purposes.

 

It gives no information as to subsequent QM2  travel.

This sort of thing may be a 'one off' for the Caribbean sailings - if all the ports visited are WHTI compliant, and there were no manifest changes [nobody embarked or disembarked] then all in transit passengers [and crew] were known at the previous departure from Brooklyn. Any discrepancies between in transit passengers and newly embarking passengers for the eastbound crossing are UK Border Force's problem - not US Homeland Security. 

[Victoria2]

5 hours ago, ace2542 said:

Does this mean that passenger will no longer need the ESTA if not U.S Citizens? After all you don't need one to travel over the USA to Mexico for instance

All travellers to the US travelling under the VWP have to have an ESTA'

Edited December 2, 2022 by Victoria2

[Underwatr]

12 minutes ago, TheOldBear said:

and there were no manifest changes [nobody embarked or disembarked]

Typically entertainers rotate in the Caribbean (for example in Barbados) but even with just passengers there are typically a few unplanned emergency disembarkations that would technically result in a manifest change.
Didn't QM2 have a medical evacuation on the first or second day south out of New York this trip? Would that be enough from the viewpoint of US authorities to count as a manifest change?

[buchanan101]

3 minutes ago, Victoria2 said:

I don't think you can automatically assume an ESTA isn't required to board the ship if destined for a US port. All this directive seems to be saying is if a passenger doesn't want to leave the ship when in this particular US port, and on this particular itinerary, then they don't have to disembark for immigration purposes.

 

It gives no information as to subsequent QM2  travel.

Agreed - Cunard won't know what your intentions in the US are at Southampton and how would you prove it in any case.  And they are probably liable for fines for anyone travelling without - so they'd just stop boarding.

 

However a couple we met on the QM2 - she hadn't updated his ESTA (she was in charge of documents) because they had different expiry dates, so she had to wave an old application or approval or something in front of Cunard and fool them.. and then apply for the ESTA from the ship on the way across...

[bluemarble]

6 minutes ago, Underwatr said:

Typically entertainers rotate in the Caribbean (for example in Barbados) but even with just passengers there are typically a few unplanned emergency disembarkations that would technically result in a manifest change.
Didn't QM2 have a medical evacuation on the first or second day south out of New York this trip? Would that be enough from the viewpoint of US authorities to count as a manifest change?

 

There was a group with luggage who I assumed were entertainers who appeared to be embarking in Barbados. We also had a medical evacuation off North Carolina that delayed our arrival in St Maarten.

 

I expect we will know more about this Immigration and Customs procedure if it is also in place for the December 15 crossing from Southampton that will be arriving at Brooklyn on December 22.

[Jacqueline]

Fingers crossed that this will help with the disembarkation process.

[ace2542]

2 hours ago, Victoria2 said:

All travellers to the US travelling under the VWP have to have an ESTA'

Not for travelling through or over U.S airspace apparently? And how is not disembarking any different than that. It will be interesting to see if any banned person can cruise and sit on a ship.

[Victoria2]

24 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

Not for travelling through or over U.S airspace apparently? And how is not disembarking any different than that. It will be interesting to see if any banned person can cruise and sit on a ship.

I have absolutely no idea what will happen for future itineraries and won't speculate other than to say flying over a country isn't the same as the mode of travel making landfall in the same country.

 

I'm sure US DHS will have it all under review. 🙂

[Essiesmom]

I wonder if perhaps Cunard just left out some instructions.  Sometimes when a ship has a large number of continuing cruisers, CBP comes aboard and clears everyone without them having to leave the ship.  Happened to us in Tampa.  EM

[Patria21]

I believe the QM2’s previous stop was St. Thomas. If so, that could be the answer: the passengers had already cleared US immigration there. 

[Underwatr]

Perhaps, except that I've never seen a US Immigration check when St. Thomas is the final Caribbean QM2 stop, and there's no customs/immigration facility at the Crown Bay cruise port.

Edited December 4, 2022 by Underwatr

[Jacqueline]

We did walk thru the customs line. Very similar to the cruise ports in Miami. We didn’t clear anything in St Thomas.

this summer we were on a Disney cruise and had an identical experience during disembarking. Painless!!! Yay!!

[57eric]

23 hours ago, Underwatr said:

Perhaps, except that I've never seen a US Immigration check when St. Thomas is the final Caribbean QM2 stop, and there's no customs/immigration facility at the Crown Bay cruise port.

Not only that, but wouldn't they have to zero out the ship of passengers AND luggage?

[Essiesmom]

14 hours ago, 57eric said:

Not only that, but wouldn't they have to zero out the ship of passengers AND luggage?

No, because they are only zero-ing out for immigration, not customs.  When you do a B2B in any US port (except Whittier or Seward) you might have to get off to zero down, but your luggage stays in your cabin.  EM

[exlondoner]

39 minutes ago, Essiesmom said:

No, because they are only zero-ing out for immigration, not customs.  When you do a B2B in any US port (except Whittier or Seward) you might have to get off to zero down, but your luggage stays in your cabin.  EM

Just imagine having to take all luggage off, if calling at NY in the early stages of a world cruise.

[ace2542]

17 hours ago, exlondoner said:

Just imagine having to take all luggage off, if calling at NY in the early stages of a world cruise.

Imagine not being able to do the world cruise because you are banned from America for some reason. If you don't have to get off the ship and enter the country phsyically - and you can fly over the USA even if banned so far as I am aware -  then perhaps there is hope for that trip for those people.