A French scientist traveling to the United States for an academic conference was denied entry after border officials searched his phone and found messages critical of President Donald Trump. The incident, which took place on March 9, has sparked international condemnation and raised concerns about political bias in U.S. immigration enforcement.
The scientist, whose name has not been publicly disclosed, was scheduled to attend a conference in Houston, Texas. While it remains unclear why he was singled out for additional scrutiny, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents searched his electronic devices upon arrival. They found messages exchanged with colleagues that reportedly criticized the Trump administration’s research policies.
According to a source cited by Agence France-Presse (AFP), CBP agents interpreted these messages as evidence of “hatred towards Trump” that could be “qualified as terrorism.” The FBI briefly opened an inquiry but closed it soon afterward. However, the scientist was still denied entry and sent back to France the following day.
CBP has broad authority to inspect travelers’ electronic devices, but such searches remain rare, occurring in fewer than 1 in every 10,000 arrivals. A spokesperson for the agency, Hilton Beckham, defended the decision, stating:
“All persons arriving at a port of entry to the United States are subject to inspection on a case-by-case basis.”
Beckham also pointed to CBP’s policy that electronic searches are used to determine “an individual’s intentions upon entry to the United States and thus provide additional information relevant to admissibility of foreign nationals under U.S. immigration laws.”
The scientist’s expulsion prompted strong criticism from France’s Minister of Higher Education and Research, Philippe Baptiste. In a public statement, he condemned the move, calling it a violation of academic freedom:
“Freedom of opinion, free research, and academic freedom are values that we will continue to proudly uphold. I will defend the right of all French researchers to be faithful to them, while respecting the law.”
Baptiste suggested that the scientist was expelled solely for expressing personal views on Trump’s research policies. The minister has been an outspoken critic of Trump’s cuts to scientific research funding and has publicly encouraged American researchers to relocate to France.
On the same day the scientist was denied entry, Baptiste issued an open invitation for U.S.-based researchers to consider moving to France. He later posted about a virtual meeting with a University of Maryland researcher who had accepted an offer from Aix-Marseille University. Days later, he reiterated his concerns about U.S. science policy, stating:
“Research on health, climate, energy, and AI is being chainsawed in the United States.”
The incident adds to growing concerns that the Trump administration is targeting foreign nationals based on their political views. Just a month before the scientist’s deportation, Vice President J.D. Vance asserted that the administration defends free speech, stating:
“In Washington, there is a new sheriff in town. And under Donald Trump’s leadership, we may disagree with your views, but we will fight to defend your right to offer them in the public square.”
However, this latest expulsion—along with other instances of visa denials and detentions—contradicts those claims. Trump’s administration has previously targeted individuals such as Badar Khan Suri, a Georgetown postdoctoral researcher detained for his pro-Palestine views, and Mahmoud Khalil, a green card holder who faced visa complications after criticizing U.S. foreign policy.
The denial of entry for the French scientist raises concerns about the future of international scientific exchange. If personal political views become a factor in border decisions, it could deter foreign researchers from attending conferences or collaborating with U.S. institutions.
It also sets a worrying precedent: If criticism of the U.S. government can be grounds for exclusion, what does this mean for the academic freedom of foreign scholars?
A CBP spokesperson rejected concerns that the decision was politically motivated, stating:
“Claims that such decisions are politically motivated are completely unfounded.”
Despite these assurances, the incident continues to draw scrutiny from human rights and academic organizations, who warn that politically driven border enforcement could undermine the credibility of the U.S. as a destination for global scholarship.
COMMENTS