{"id":185297,"date":"2018-10-12T03:25:46","date_gmt":"2018-10-12T07:25:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=185297"},"modified":"2018-10-12T03:25:46","modified_gmt":"2018-10-12T07:25:46","slug":"u-s-now-says-employees-canadas-marijuana-industry-will-generally-admissible-personal-travel","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2018\/10\/12\/u-s-now-says-employees-canadas-marijuana-industry-will-generally-admissible-personal-travel\/","title":{"rendered":"U.S. now says employees of Canada\u2019s marijuana industry will be \u2018generally admissible\u2019 for personal travel"},"content":{"rendered":"<figure id=\"attachment_144838\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-144838\" style=\"width: 1000px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/shutterstock_625586630.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-144838\" src=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/shutterstock_625586630.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"1000\" height=\"609\" srcset=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/shutterstock_625586630.jpg 1000w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/shutterstock_625586630-300x183.jpg 300w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/shutterstock_625586630-768x468.jpg 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-144838\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">However, Canadians travelling to the U.S. for a purpose that\u2019s related to the marijuana industry \u201cmay be deemed inadmissible,\u201d the revised statement warns. (Shutterstock)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>U.S. Customs and Border Protection has updated its rules concerning employees of Canada\u2019s legal marijuana industry, saying they will \u201cgenerally be admissible\u201d to the United States if the purpose of their travel is unrelated to the industry.<\/p>\n<p>The update, published October 9, brings some clarity to the agency\u2019s earlier statement on the issue from September 21 that said working in the Canada\u2019s marijuana industry \u201cmay affect admissibility to the U.S.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The vague original statement fired confusion and concern among employees of Canada\u2019s budding marijuana industry, who feared they could be banned altogether from visiting the United States.<\/p>\n<p>The updated statement now reads: \u201cA Canadian citizen working in or facilitating the proliferation of the legal marijuana industry in Canada, coming to the U.S. for reasons unrelated to the marijuana industry will generally be admissible to the U.S.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>However, Canadians travelling to the U.S. for a purpose that\u2019s related to the marijuana industry \u201cmay be deemed inadmissible,\u201d the revised statement warns.<\/p>\n<p>Canada is set to legalize the recreational use of marijuana on October 17, but the sale, possession, production, distribution and importation of the drug remains illegal under U.S. federal law.<\/p>\n<p>Nine U.S. states have legalized the recreational use of marijuana and 30 states have legalized medical marijuana, but U.S. federal law supersedes state laws.<\/p>\n<p>The updated statement does not say whether Canadians who admit to the recreational use of marijuana will be refused entry to the United States.<\/p>\n<p>It does, however, say that anyone deemed to be a \u201cdrug abuser or addict\u201d or who admits to committing acts that violate\u00a0state, federal or foreign laws regarding controlled substances will be inadmissible to the United States.<\/p>\n<p><strong><em>For more information on admissibility issues,\u00a0please send a detailed email to\u00a0<a href=\"mailto:crim@canadavisa.com\">crim@canadavisa.com<\/a>.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>U.S. Customs and Border Protection has updated its rules concerning employees of Canada\u2019s legal marijuana industry, saying they will \u201cgenerally &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":144838,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-185297","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-immigration","mauthors-cic-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/185297","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=185297"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/185297\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/144838"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=185297"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=185297"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=185297"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}