Does CBP Have A PR Problem?


Dateline Mar. 30, 2008, Chicago
Today, the above cartoon by Dan Piraro appeared in Parade Magazine, which is shoved into the Chicago Tribune in the company of the Best Buy and Circuit City ad supplements. For reasons that escape me and likely make Parade execs very happy, I always leaf through it but rarely read anything in it. I suspect it has much to do with my personal love-hate for Marilyn Vos Savant. As an aside, her explication of the three-door-game-show problem is worthy of reading although not to the standard of The Straight Dope on jets on treadmills.

So, what does this cartoon say about the public perception of Customs & Border Protection? Is the agency perceived as corrupt? Or, is it merely considered annoying and this shows that in the extreme? Note how everything from the luggage is set out neatly. Is the inspector and obsessive-compulsive bureaucrat? Plus, he's armed. Is there an implied threat here?

What about the art itself? Note the very high-quality rendering of the old seal of the Customs Service. By avoiding the current seal, has the artist intentionally implied that this episode took place prior to 2003 or is it an intentional anachronism? If so, why? Perhaps to avoid spreading malicious lies about today's hard working Customs professionals.

These are important questions. Without these very important questions, I would just be posting a cartoon from the paper, like the annoying Ziggy or Family Circus that shows up on the bulletin board or refrigerator without warning. I'm not doing that. I am using the cartoon as a vehicle for social commentary, criticism, scholarship, and news reporting. That seems like a fair use and I'm sure my friends who are copyright lawyers will agree.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ruling of the Week 2015.8: Old Jersey and Pitcairn Island

Image
For today's ROTW, I set out looking for a ruling dealing with some far off and preferably warm location. Turns out that, with the exception of coastwise transit issues, there are no Customs and Border Protection rulings involving Pitcairn Island or any of several Pacific Ocean microstates including Tuvalu , Niue , and Kiribati . Pitcairn Island What I did find is an interesting question about the country of origin marking for products of the Bailiwick of Jersey Island, Channel Islands. The ruling is HQ 561938 (Mar. 18, 2002). For those of you who may not know, Jersey is an island off the coast of Normandy, France. It is an independent international actor and not part of the U.K. although the U.K. is responsible for its defense and external relations. Also, the Queen is the Head of State in her capacity as "the Crown in Right of Jersey." It is, according to the U.S. Department of State, a " Crown Dependency " along with the Isle of Man and the Bailiwick o...
Read more

CAFC Decision in Double Invoicing Case

The Federal Circuit has issued a decision on the merits in United States v. Inn Foods, Inc.  There had been a previous decision on jurisdiction, which was followed by a trial at the Court of International Trade and then this appeal on the substance. The initial issue is whether Inn Foods' invoicing practice amounts to fraud.  Inn Foods had been receiving an invoice from growers in Mexico that had a relatively low sales prices on it.  Subsequent to entry, Inn Foods created a second invoice at something more similar to market value, retaining the original invoice number, and paid at that higher amount.   Superficially, this looks like a standard-issue double-invoicing scheme.  But, in the age of reconciliation, is it really more like a provisional pricing mechanism?  It might have been possible to make that argument had Inn Foods adjusted its entries accordingly.  It didn't and the loss of revenue was approximately $624,000.  Based on testimony and evidence indicating both knowl...
Read more

Ninestar and UFLPA Exhaustion

Image
Exhaustion is a key doctrine in administrative law. When applicable, it requires that a party unhappy with an agency’s determination complete the administrative appeal process before turning to the courts for judicial review. Requiring exhaustion typically promotes judicial efficiency by ensuring that disputes are resolved at the agency and, if they are not, that there is a complete record of the agency process. Exhaustion also ensures that the judiciary respects the executive agencies and their expertise.  There are, on the other hand, times when the courts will find that exhaustion is not necessary or appropriate. Such is the case in  Ninestar Corporation et al. v. United States  et al., a decision of the U.S. Court of International Trade.  Ninestar is also interesting because it is one of the first cases in the CIT involving the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, known as UFLPA. In my hiatus from active blogging, I missed the rise of UFLPA as a major compliance t...
Read more