Comment by antonymoose 8 hours ago
The big question, and please don’t go ape on me, is were these workers actually here with proper visas, did corporate screw up, or was this willful action on the part of the individuals?
I’m tired of seeing stories with no real facts and similarly tired of comment sections discussing the issue without them either.
What actually happened here?
I believe a lot of them were on B-1/B-2 business visas (or equivalent ESTA), which are typically intended for "business meetings", not for "work". However, because the US immigration system is completely broken. getting a real work visa such as an H-1B or an L-1 is a time consuming process. The historical equilibrium has been that some kinds of things classified as "work" are permissible on B-1/B-2 visas.
A similar activity that technically flouts the rules is responding to your work email while on a business trip. Or for software people, reviewing PRs on GitHub. Neither of those activities are business meetings, but both are generally tolerated.
Chesterton's fence is kind of important! The overall problem is that the world has become globalized but immigration policy just hasn't kept up.
None of this is to defend in any way the appalling conditions the workers were subjected to. But also, note that these conditions are not out of the ordinary. People get stuck in immigration detention for years.
> I believe a lot of them were on B-1/B-2 business visas (or equivalent ESTA), which are typically intended for "business meetings", not for "work".
B-1/B-2 does allow some work. Specifically setting up complex equipment and also training workers. Here's the CBP manual: https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/B-1%20perm...
> If the contract of sale specifically requires the seller to provide these services or training, and you possess specialized knowledge essential to the seller's contractual obligation to perform the services or training it may be permissible for you to perform these services. In addition, the machinery or equipment must have been manufactured at a location outside of the United States and you may not receive compensation from a U.S. source.
Now the catch is that people on B1/B2 visas have NO recourse if _any_ border official decides that they violate the visa rules. And the rules themselves are really unclear.
Thanks. I guess it's even more complex than my understanding then, and a matter for lawyers aware of the case law to handle.
Putting these people into chains was, as the linked article puts it: "Imperial Tyranny", and a completely unnecessary humiliation of the workers. Regardless of their visa status.
Yes. If the issue is the visas, revoke them, inform them, tell them to leave.
If they ignore you like 3 times, maybe escort them to a flight.
At least they weren't blackbagged and sent to Sudan without records.
I find it odd that people seem to sincerely not understand how much grey area there is regarding some of these issues. I'm pretty sure at least once in our careers most people have traveled internationally for business, but been told to say it's "personal". These cases could all potentially be violating visa laws, but most people don't think of themselves as "illegal immigrants" in these scenarios.
In this case the issue seem to be a debate around specifically what types of work these people were permitted to perform on their visas, with the union arguing, in their self-interest, that the work they were doing did not qualify.
Back in 2016 when people were asking whether maybe Melania was working illegally when she first arrived, (yeah, remember when "Maybe his wife did something which may have been illegal" counted as news?) I pointed out to friends that roughly the same time she entered the US so did I, and I didn't have any real paperwork at all, in fact I turned up with a photocopy of somebody else's Amex to check in at my hotel.
If teenage me had been dragged aside and asked to prove I'm legal to work I have nothing. Where am I staying? Well I have a hotel reservation. OK, and how are you paying? Well here's a photocopy of my English boss' Amex that'll work right?
Everything was fine of course, as far as I know it was entirely legal, I was the foreign employee of a huge US firm, temporarily in the country to train people, by the time I left I had my own Amex and the hotel was paid with that, I was waved through both borders, no problem. But I had no proof of any sort, if you had wanted to detain me and insist you need documentation I had none. Maybe my bosses could have cleared it up? I just assumed it would be fine, and it was.
In 2025 I wouldn't recommend travelling to the US. A friend went, rich white guy with his very normal family, no doubt nothing seemed weird for them but if he'd asked me whether it's a good idea I'd say "No".
> I'm pretty sure at least once in our careers most people have traveled internationally for business, but been told to say it's "personal". These cases could all potentially be violating visa laws
I've never done this, despite having worked abroad on a few occasions. When my visa ran out and I had to apply out of the country, I went home and applied and a few months later went back.
This is my understanding of the situation too from watching some news shows. During Biden's term, there was a need\interest in getting this factory running quickly. There wasn't a proper visa defined within our legal code. The US gov encouraged them to come with personal or tourist visas in order to expedite the process of getting the factory up and running. It seems like this understanding didn't quite transfer from Biden to Trump's administration and the deportation happened.
I find it odd that you would expect the average HNer to understand complexities of international visas in the United States? This site is a bunch of young software engineers with some other interesting professions in the mix?
People have an emotional need to believe that the law is clear-cut and full of bright lines, because a) it makes it easier to say things like "they deserved it" to anyone who ended up on the wrong side of it and b) because it's scary to think that you can do everything "correctly" and end up in trouble anyway.
They literally don't believe you when you explain that this is false of the law in general, and especially false of immigration law, which is deliberately designed to have tons of ambiguity and discretion in it, to enable selective enforcement and keep guest workers afraid and exploitable in their ambiguous status.
I've been in CLE classes about immigration law with practising lawyers who are shocked and disoriented when a sitting immigration judge explains how that corner of the legal system works. Criminal defense lawyers in particular are taken aback by the discovery that many constitutional/procedural norms they've taken for granted their whole career simply don't apply.
It doesn't matter if they were or weren't. Its a fucking civil offense at best.
This woman called ICE and they shackled these people up like it was the 1800s again.
At least some of them were not on the correct visas, and it's possible some may have overstayed.
The most egregious violation was that they were using Korean contractors for construction and there is no visa for that.
Also if you are going on a business trip, your company organises your visa for you. You cant really refuse, it's part of your job. So I feel quite sorry for these workers becuase they've been caught in the crossfire.
CBP disagrees with you: https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/B-1%20perm...
Here’s a fact we know, South Koreans are eligible for the VWP. [1]
[1] https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/tourism-...
a leaked document shows that at least one person was recognized to have the appropriate visa and was coerced into leaving "voluntarily". no details on how prevalent this was have been released
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/10/hyundai-fact...
Who would need to be coerced? If I were in a foreign country and their paramilitary border force treated me like that, I'd GTFO, shake the dust off my feet, and never consider going back to such a crazy dangerous place - no matter how the legal nonsense was ultimately resolved.
Usually when a company needs to send someone to another country to do training or some work for a week or two they just go as tourist because it’s incredibly expensive and time-consuming to get a proper work visa issued for them for one or two weeks. Especially if you need someone over right away to deal with an emergency so the world just sort of assumes you do that. It’s not the letter of the law but the system in place doesn’t allow for these sorts of situations.
It's the letter of the law, it's a temporary business visa.
The USA calls it B-1.
https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary...
(I have no comment on the relevance of this to the article.)
ESTA should permit B-1 and B-2 type travel if you're from a VWP-eligible country (which South Korea is).
I have a friend in an amateur band, they wanted to do a US tour so they applied for a performers visa, paid thousands of dollars and got the application denied, so now he can't even go as a tourist. <shrug>
If you have ever had your visa denied, you are no longer eligible for VWP tourist visa as government finds it high risk of doing something incompatible with your visa.
It's easy to enter the US on business under the visa waiver program, but I think there are a lot of restrictions on what sort of business activities are acceptable. Thus it's fine to do market research or pitch your product to potential investors or distributors, but if you do work and collect a paycheck inside the US (even if it's at the office or factory of a Korean company) you need a proper work visa.
This case is additionally complicated as some of the construction work was being done by Latino workers who (like many construction workers) may not have had valid immigration paperwork.
B1/B2 visa allows some construction work: https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/B-1%20perm...
In particular, worker training and equipment installation/setup. This seems to be exactly the case there.
From what I can tell, the company did misuse the specific visa but it's generally a grey area that the US has historically turned a blind eye to. Given that Korea is a strong ally of the US and the project was done at the behest of Trump for reviving manufacturing, I feel like some leeway should've been given & more diplomatic means used rather than parading the Koreans around like gang members
A classic case of applying the letter of the law rather than the spirit of the law.
The number of human beings in the West who can discern the difference and use wisdom and intelligence appears to be declining.
Everything is now either black or white.
What does that tell you about Anglo Western Culture?
I have always seen people - the same people - being able to use arguments based on letter or spirit of the law depending on the situation. I'm not seeing a trend towards one or the other.
Some call it hypocrisy - and normally the same people are capable of displaying hypocrisy in other arguments too.
> I’m tired of seeing stories with no real facts and similarly tired of comment sections discussing the issue without them either.
Major stories (NYT) have covered at least one person wrongly detained:
> Almost 500 people were detained during a raid of a Georgia battery plant owned by two South Korean manufacturers last week, the largest immigration enforcement operation at one location in the history of the Department of Homeland Security.
> But in at least one instance, officials admitted a worker was employed legally and forced him to leave the country anyway, according to documents reviewed by The New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/12/business/economy/hyundai-...
FT says it all: Korean companies admit cutting corners on US visas but say they have little choice. South Korean companies have routinely used unsuitable visas for workers sent to the US to build multibillion-dollar advanced manufacturing sites, according to Seoul-based executives and industry groups
https://www.ft.com/content/c677b9aa-2e89-4feb-a56f-f3c8452b3...
With all due respect, please provide respect of your own to me.
I’ve seen a dozen articles and discussions around this topic - none of which provide any facts, just vitriol such as yours. I genuinely want to hear the actual truth of the story. I’ve never heard of any plate watering stories or anything else. I’m not here making a case. I’m asking for facts I may have missed, facts that TFA lacks.
Are you looking for information about the exact visa status of the workers, or information about conditions during their detention?
If the former, there's probably not much information to go on.
But what people are reacting to is the insane treatment of people.
If that's what you are looking for information about, how high standards of proof do you require?
I’ve been reading this story since it came out, I’m actually from Savannah. It’s a very political story with bad coverage as a result. I have never read a story that wasn’t vague with no details which is why I asked.
The specifics of this depend on information that only ICE has, which they're being uncharacteristically circumspect about. This report has the most detail I've seen, though still not much: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/12/immigration-...
I have seen acknowledgements in the Korean press that there may have been some irregularity on the corporate end due to the administrative complexities involved. Given that SK is quite bureaucratic itself, that seems to me like a criticism they would be receptive towards. But the security measures like shackling all detainees and the bad detention conditions are landing with the public there (according to friends of mine as well as this editorial article) as an insult to Korean dignity which is really intolerable, eg leading respectable political figures there to muse openly about whether the time has come for SK to have an independent nuclear deterrent.
I think US policymakers often fail to realize that the US is an outlier among developed countries for the severity and indignity of its law enforcement practices. Most countries grant criminal defendants far more privacy pending conviction, in contrast to the publication of mugshots and home addresses that obtain in many US jurisdictions, and are far less inclined toward the use of physical restraints or harsh detention environments. South Korea in particular associates systematically harsh conditions with the autocratic regime of North Korea so they've been deeply startled to see such conditions inflicted upon their nationals by their main ally.