We can discuss some things
in theory, so long as we recognize that there's no evidence supporting the claims beyond one person's say-so. SHould a CBP Officer have been "just yelling at the top of his lungs?" No. But I have my doubts that's what happened. Perhaps a raised voice in response to resistance to a command to follow the line structure. Is it possible it happened? Yes. Acceptable as described? No. Likely as described? Also, no.
Other aspects - the refusal itself or the holdover at the Honolulu FDC - are absolutely believable, and not at all outrageous. US law states (as cited earlier) that an alien bears the burden of proof when it comes to admissibility. CBP decided she had not met that burden and refused her admission. Is "too many clothes" a justification, by itself, to refuse an applicant for admission? I would say in almost all cases not. Could "too many clothes" be
part of a
broader collection of facts that contributed to the conclusion that she hadn't met her burden? Absolutely. Is it possible it happened? Yes. Acceptable as described? Probably not. Likely as described? Also, probably not. The story expands on the extent of the questioning, covering her employment, tattoos, and marriage. This is totally unsurprising and not even a little bit unjustified. Employment is a factor in considering ties to home country that compel her return; if she's unemployed, there's no motivation from that angle to return. If she's on a leave of absence, that's a little different. If she's on vacation time, that's even more different. I see nothing untoward in asking if her tattoos have a meaning. Having just seen an image of her sleeve in a post above, my first inclination would be to ask if she's an artist herself -- possibly seeking employment or performing work for hire. And it's entirely possible that's a standard question in that particular officer's process, as normal as asking about any criminal convictions or questions establishing alienage. And of course they're going to ask about her marriage -- that's a pretty strong motivator to not return home and instead attempt to adjust status (an intent for which at the time of application for admission makes a person inadmissible -- an intending immigrant -- and we've already established it's the alien's burden to overcome).
When it comes to the detention, I totally believe she was sent to the FDC for an overnight stay. According to CBP's
Airport Wait Time page, "last Sunday" (5/18, based on the story's publication date of 5/23) saw the last passengers at HNL processed no later than noon. With no flights to work, they are extremely unlikely to have staff available to monitor her until her flight out the next day. Because the FDC is
immediately adjacent to the airport it's far more cost-effective to park her there for the night than to pay two officers (at least, and probably more considering there was at least one other detainee awaiting a return flight) overtime all night until the next day's officers arrived. And it's possible she was held "with" murderers, as in "existed in the same detention facility as." The story clarifies that "she shared a cell with a woman from Fiji, who was also denied entry and waiting to be deported." I have a hard time getting worked up over the mere fact of co-existing within the same structure as "murder[ers] and drug offen[ders]." Is it possible it happened? Yes. Acceptable as described? Yes. Likely as described? Also, yes.
Was she denied phone contact with her family? Unknown. Should someone have made contact? Yes. Did it need to be her? Not necessarily. Is it possible it happened? Yes. Acceptable as described? No. Likely as described? Ehhhhhh, maybe even Steven.