You have not seen a passenger go through any US airport, clear customs and catch a connection with hand luggage containing liquids. You may have seen them carrying liquids through customs and immigration but they either checked them after that or surrendered them. There is one exception. If you had a US customs preclearance facility at the departure airport (Dublin ect.) In that case you deplane into the sterile area and do not require rescreening.

Any international arriving flight will have all the trash and left over food collected and disposed of as "regulated garbage." Usually burned at a on airport incinerator.

Having crossed the US border many many times by land and air I would say that the woman did something to piss the inspector off. They have discretion and I have benefited from it more than once. Quick tip, the right answer always includes "Sir", admit a mistake and never argue.
If she did use Global Entry it may well be the fine is automatic. As others have pointed out it is an honor system, you tick the boxes and in this case she effectively lied and that will piss the inspector off big time. It would not surprise me if her Global Entry was cancelled. When you sign up there are plenty of warnings what will happen if you cheat. At $500 she was lucky. I'm surprised she was not strip searched.
EDIT - I see her Global Entry was cancelled. No doubt she is flagged in the system and I'd suggest clean underwear for the next international trip.

When you say that you were "leaving the flight" do you mean that you were going to be immediately boarding another flight for someplace else, or do you mean that after going through customs you were going to walk out of the terminal and catch a cab to your hotel? Either way, I have never heard of anyone clearing US customs without their checked luggage. Unless you were boarding a connecting flight to another country. Were you continuing on to Canada or Mexico from Atlanta?


Edit: I see that I missed this bit:

Well, it's pretty clear what happened. (and pretty ordinary and usual) . From the bold comment that you had checked your bag and the remedy offered was to retrieve it, put the wine in it and them recheck it again, it's clear that you were not exiting onto the streets of Atlanta. If you were going to "the outside world" your baggage would have been in your hand. You were going to be boarding a connecting flight, after clearing customs with your checked luggage, you had re-checked your luggage for the next flight segment and you were going through security for your next flight, with a prohibited item. (bottle of wine) . It's no mystery. After you clear customs, you have to go through security screening before boarding your next flight. It should be obvious why; there are items which are permissible in your checked luggage which are prohibited to take on board in your carry on:. Knives, Firearms (depending on where you're traveling) bottles of wine. When you clear customs, you claim your checked baggage, and therefore potentially have access to prohibited (to carry on) item in your checked baggage. So after you've had access to your checked baggage, you have to go through screening again before being permitted back into the secure are of the terminal, exactly as if you'd just been dropped off at the airport and were boarding your first flight of the journey.

Glad I was able to solve this decade old mystery for you. ;)

So, now that I've solved l.garey's mystery, maybe someone else can solve mine. Why do you have *outbound* agriculture inspections leaving Hawaii on a domestic flight to another place in the US? To be clear, it is not the US Department of Agriculture, it's the State of Hawaii Agriculture department. Your baggage will be inspected for agricultural products (mostly pineapple) you are "smuggling" *out* of Hawaii ... so why does the State of Hawaii care what you take out of the state of Hawaii? I could understand inspecting *inbound* passengers for pineapple from someplace else ... might harbor disease of insects which could be detrimental to pineapple growing industry in Hawaii. For the same reasons, I could understand, say, the State of California agriculture authorities inspecting for pineapple *arriving* from Hawaii. California also grows pineapple, and they do have agriculture inspections at state borders for citrus particularly. I could see the logic for either. But why, if I buy a pineapple in the grocery store on Maui, and toss it in my suitcase to take back to Alaska, will the State of Hawaii inspect my luggage and confiscate my pineapple?

A Squared - it's actually a USDA rule, not Hawaii state and it's simply that Hawaii might have its own species of critters that could cause agricultural problems on the US mainland. Whether this is sensible or not is another matter, but there have been some serious issues in Hawaii (e.g., ohia rot and banana bunchy) and guess they're just being cautious. I think the Hawaii State of Agriculture dept does the screening as that's the most efficient way to it. To have the screening done at the arrival airport would, of course, be rather expensive and complicated to arrange as Hawaii flights arrive at domestic terminals.

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/res...aiian_products

Thanks. that's the first explanation I've see that makes sense. I guess I was a little misled by the fact that it was HI state inspectors doing it.

Well. All this over an apple. And a bunch of insufferably smug aviation "professionals" bemoaning the passenger in question. Typical PPRuNe!

If only Americans were as officious about people carrying guns into their schools and machine-gunning kids in the corridors. Still, we know for many Yanks "hey, that's life"

:yuk:

Not so much bemoaning the passenger in question (though that too) as bemoaning those who can not see that "an apple" can be a serious threat to agriculture, that deliberately misleading an appointed official "'cause it's just one apple" is wrong or just for being supercilious.

Please present your proof of this accusation. It's entirely possible she had filled in the landing card before receiving the apple, or that the apple simply didn't register with her as being declarable, she just unconsciously shoved it into her bag along with the other airline freebies you inevitably get handed throughout the trip.

No proof whatsoever. I had previously given her the benefit of the doubt.
But in light of the reported cancellation of her Global Entry and why that would happen she has forfeited that courtesy.

Now I'll just follow the observation of Gertrude - The lady doth protest too much, methinks

Yes you can, indeed I did exactly that only two days ago at a major European airport... with 3x standard sized bottles of very nice red wine... where perhaps the fundamental difference is that I'm typically going to work via VIP terminals (rather than those ones chock full of riffraff) and Corporate is such a breath of fresh air after the airlines. Veritably, it's definitely one law for the rich, and one for the poor. ;)

I think you're all wrong, actually. I don't think this is the case any longer since they opened the new terminal at ATL, but at several US airports (I've seen it at PDX, MCO and SEA, and the design of ATL before the F pier opened suggests strongly that it was the case there), the customs and immigration inspection takes place at a remote pier, and the only way from there to the outside world is through the regular airside. So you go through immigration, pick up your bags, go through customs, then even if you're exiting the airport you recheck your bags and go through security again. Once you take the transit or equivalent to the main terminal, you pick up your bags again at baggage claim and walk out.

So his original story definitely holds water.

Global Entry passenger should have known better, the rules re fruits and vegetables are clear and have been in force forever. Signs are also posted clearly at entry points. She didn't forget she had the apple. On the contrary, she admitted that she put it into her bag to save until later. By her own admission, this shows that it's presence was purposeful, not a "mistake".

Where she really ran afoul and earned the fine was by not declaring it. Stupid, really. Again, this is a Global Entry passenger who should know the rules on what's not allowed, what's required to be declared, and what need not be. If she had simply declared it, she would have most likely been allowed to throw it away while verbally being educated by the agent that Agricultural rules don't get set aside just because this or that airline gave away the food enroute, for consumption enroute. "Saving it for later" is purely on her.

The idea that "The airline gave it to me inflight and didn't specifically announce that I can't take it into the country despite all the forms and signage telling me I can't, so therefore Agricultural and declaration rules at the destination don't apply" is an absurd, childlike notion.

Since Global Entry works on a higher level of trust, Global Entry passengers will be held to a higher standard when it comes to knowing and adhering to the rules. It's not out of line that her excuse while breaking a basic importation rule and non-declaration earns a stiffer punishment. Her response is typical of someone who can't take responsibility for their own actions. Whining publicly, blaming others, claiming she's a victim of unfairness, and believing somehow that the rules (and punishment for breaking them) shouldn't apply to her is, unfortunately, a more and more common response. What she's really saying is we're supposed to feel sorry for her for being stupid, irresponsible, and too lazy to read.

She applied for Global Entry so I do assume she can read, so I've got no sympathy for someone who is now feigning ignorance because she got caught. If she was confused regarding the rule as it pertains to fruit given by the airline, she would have declared it. Global Entries are held to adhering to the rules or asking, it's not a free pass. She's not a Global Entry anymore, and rightly so.

So when my wife gets out something to use for later, then half an hour later spends ten minutes looking for that same exact thing, she's just doing it to mess with me? I'll tell her. I'll tell myself as well because 'I'll just put thing-that-needs-to-go-in-the-car next to my car keys so I remember it later' more often than not turns into 'where the hell did I put that thing'. Clearly I'm just doing it to wind myself up.

Columnar dwelling made of animal teeth, remove yourself from it.

OK. I suppose you're correct about that. I've only connected out of Atlanta on international arrivals so wasn't thinking about that. Regardless, that's still the explanation of why his wine was confiscated; Whether he was boarding a connecting flight, or leaving the airport; he was going through security screening to re-enter the secure area.

What your wife does is irrelevant to the incident at hand. I'm Global Entry and go through US customs on a regular basis. The only consumable I bring off the aircraft is water. I do tell other crewmembers that we can bring as much food as we want into the US... as long as it is somewhere in our gastro-intestinal tract.

I heard a story of someone bringing food in and honestly asking the officer and then having it confiscated and subsequently having issues with customs, so I don't even try that. No food, no problems.

As for the food, on a the cargo flights(where I was had time to observe the grooming process) I did arriving at a US port of entry, there are red plastic trash bags for the food which is then incinerated.

The woman never claimed she forgot about the apple in her bag. On the contrary, she stated she put it in her bag to eat during her onward flight, which is a purposeful act. She had plenty of time to think about or review the rules if she had a question beforehand, or declare it in order to obtain an answer from Customs at the entry point. If she had declared it the agent would have said "No it's fruit, says right there", tossed it, and sent her on her way.

She didn't do any of those things, however. She attempted to bring it through, undeclared, knowing it was in her bag. She's only whining because she got caught doing so, was rightfully fined, and also lost her Global Entry privileges/access because she can't be trusted to even seek an answer for a listed item (fruit or vegetable), but instead made the assumption the rule didn't apply to her and her item.

You and your wife's personal memory problems/failings when it comes to locating items in your own house are irrelevant to this Global Entry passenger being ignorant-of or ignoring the very simple and clearly written and posted rules with respect to items she must declare or not bring into the country.

As for your lost-but-not-lost household items, I bet if you and your wife posted signs and created little cards that itemized each plus clearly stated their location, something akin to how Customs writes/posts rules on what's banned and what must be declared, you wouldn't make the "mistake" of forgetting where they were for any longer than it took you to read. That's not coincidental. In fact, the entire point of writing things clearly on prominently-displayed signs and cards that one must sign after filling-out is to do just that; to ensure one doesn't remain ignorant and/or "forget stuff".

Of course, maybe this woman is the type of person who doesn't believe she should have to make an effort to read anything in order to get through life, so if information isn't spoon-fed into her head by someone else through an easier form of media then the plain, written word she can't be blamed for whatever happens. Therefore, she may believe any negative effect is "unfair" because her ignorance must be someone else's fault. Or, she knew full well but thought the chances of her being searched were low-to-nil and her "But Delta gave it to me" excuse would fly if she were. Sorry, Ms. Global Entry-no-more, it didn't.

That's a mighty high horse you're on there.

A couple of years ago I emptied out my briefcase for a periodic cleaning and noticed with some surprise a large Leatherman type tool that included a 4" knife blade -- with which I must have passed through security (domestic, US) for three or four consecutive segments.

I am fully aware that carrying a knife into the sterile area of an airport is a serious crime. I had previously placed the tool in my bag to carry to my car to change a headlamp, and simply forgot that it was there.

Obviously I did not intentionally bring the knife to the airport, but applying the same logic you seem to be applying to this passenger, you could correctly argue that (a) the knife was not in my bag by mistake, since I had put it there on purpose, (b) my presenting my bag for security screening was an implicit claim that it did not contain contraband, and (c) that I am therefore a bad person who deserved to have been fined and have my security credentials taken away. That seems a bit extreme to me.