Transportation by ship or aircraft
INA 101(a)(49) speaks of transportation aboard a vessel or aircraft. Other border entry situations require analysis under different INA provisions.
INA 212(a)(6)(D) · STOWAWAY INADMISSIBILITY
Stowaway Inadmissibility: Challenging an Incorrect Finding
An arriving stowaway faces unusually strict admission restrictions. But a historical stowaway incident alone is not a permanent bar to future visas. Precise definitions, travel records and the circumstances of arrival matter.
The Messersmith Law Firm, P.A. · Immigration inadmissibility and CBP finding counsel
THE DIRECT ANSWER
Does a prior stowaway incident prevent someone from obtaining a visa?
No, not by itself. INA 212(a)(6)(D) applies to a person arriving as a stowaway. The State Department's regulations and guidance make clear that it is not applicable at the time of a later visa application. A past incident may still create distinct immigration issues, including a prior removal.
At arrival: INA 235(a)(2) imposes stringent restrictions while recognizing a potential pathway to protection screening for those who express a fear of persecution.
01 / FULL STATUTORY TEXT
INA 212(a)(6)(D), INA 101(a)(49) and INA 235(a)(2)
The inadmissibility provision must be read with the statutory definition and the special arriving stowaway provision.
Read complete INA 212(a)(6)(D): stowaway inadmissibility
(D) Stowaways.—Any alien who is a stowaway is inadmissible.
Read complete INA 101(a)(49): who qualifies as a stowaway
(49) The term “stowaway” means any alien who obtains transportation without the consent of the owner, charterer, master or person in command of any vessel or aircraft through concealment aboard such vessel or aircraft. A passenger who boards with a valid ticket is not to be considered a stowaway.
Read complete INA 235(a)(2): arriving stowaways and protection screening
(2) Stowaways.—An arriving alien who is a stowaway is not eligible to apply for admission or to be admitted and shall be ordered removed upon inspection by an immigration officer. Upon such inspection if the alien indicates an intention to apply for asylum under section 1158 of this title or a fear of persecution, the officer shall refer the alien for an interview under subsection (b)(1)(B). A stowaway may apply for asylum only if the stowaway is found to have a credible fear of persecution under subsection (b)(1)(B). In no case may a stowaway be considered an applicant for admission or eligible for a hearing under section 1229a of this title.
Consular regulation: 22 CFR 40.64: INA 212(a)(6)(D) is not applicable at the time of visa application. 22 CFR 40.64 ↗
02 / STATUTORY DEFINITION
What must the government establish?
Being aboard an aircraft or vessel without proper paperwork is not, by itself, the entire statutory test.
Concealment aboard the carrier
The person must have obtained transportation through concealment. The factual basis for concealment matters.
Transportation without required consent
The statute identifies the owner, charterer, master or person in command as relevant sources of consent. Permission and boarding evidence can be decisive.
Valid ticket exclusion
A person who boarded with a valid ticket is expressly excluded from the statutory definition of stowaway.
Arrival versus history
The ground addresses a person arriving as a stowaway, not an indefinite continuing bar based solely on a remote incident.
Separate grounds remain distinct
Fraud, removal, document defects and unlawful presence have their own statutory elements and consequences.
03 / ARRIVAL AND PROTECTION
Special rules for arriving stowaways
Congress established a distinct statutory framework for removal and asylum screening under INA 235(a)(2).
Admission and removal restrictions
An arriving stowaway is generally not eligible to apply for admission and is subject to removal upon inspection under the specific statutory rule.
Ordinary removal proceedings
The statute excludes an arriving stowaway from an INA 240 removal hearing; this is not the same procedural framework as every other inadmissibility case.
Fear or asylum concerns
When an arriving stowaway indicates an intention to seek asylum or fear of persecution, the statute provides for referral for credible fear screening.
Credible fear and asylum consideration
The statute conditions asylum consideration on a credible fear determination and does not equate that screening with admission.
Consequences may extend beyond the incident
A removal order, immigration history and separate grounds may matter for later immigration benefits even though the stowaway ground itself is not a later visa bar.
04 / CHALLENGE OR RECONSIDERATION
Challenge or Request Reconsideration of an Inadmissibility Finding
A stowaway classification should be grounded in the statutory definition and reliable carrier and government records. Attorney review can reveal errors with serious consequences.
Concealment was never established
A mistaken inference about the manner of boarding or location aboard a carrier can undercut the allegation that transportation was obtained through concealment.
Documented ticket or permission
A valid ticket expressly excludes the passenger from the definition. Authorization and the legal significance of carrier records can also call a classification into question.
Inaccurate carrier or CBP records
Passenger manifests, flight or voyage records, contemporaneous statements and translation issues may expose an unreliable account of boarding or transport.
Wrong statutory ground
Mislabeling unauthorized presence or a paperwork irregularity as a stowaway can improperly blend distinct statutory requirements.
Historical conduct mislabeled as current ineligibility
An old stowaway event does not independently make a person ineligible for a new visa under INA 212(a)(6)(D). A contrary consular finding may merit legal reconsideration.
Protection related errors
Where an arriving person expressed fear or sought asylum, the separate INA 235(a)(2) protections and agency characterization of the statements deserve counsel review.
05 / IMMIGRANT VISA ANALYSIS
Immigrant visa waiver: not required for this ground at a visa application
The practical objective is to separate a historical event from the current legal eligibility determination, rather than seek a waiver of a nonapplicable ground.
Not applicable at immigrant visa interview
Under 22 CFR 40.64 and 9 FAM 302.9-6, INA 212(a)(6)(D) does not apply at the time of visa application.
No ordinary stowaway immigrant waiver needed
Because the ground does not apply at the visa stage, an immigrant applicant with only a past stowaway incident does not seek a routine INA 212(a)(6)(D) waiver.
INA 212(k): NOT AVAILABLE
The separate waiver in INA 212(k) is not an immigrant waiver for stowaway inadmissibility.
INA 212(i) addresses another ground
INA 212(i) is a fraud or willful material misrepresentation waiver; it is not a waiver for arriving as a stowaway.
Prior removal analyzed independently
Past removal and other events may create distinct INA 212(a)(9) issues even though the stowaway ground itself is not a current visa ineligibility.
Petition approval and admissibility are separate
A family or employment petition does not itself resolve independent admissibility or prior removal issues.
06 / NONIMMIGRANT VISA ANALYSIS
Nonimmigrant visa waiver: ordinarily not required for this ground
The State Department expressly treats INA 212(a)(6)(D) as inapplicable at the nonimmigrant visa application stage.
INA 212(a)(6)(D): not applicable at visa application
The past fact of having been a stowaway alone is not a present nonimmigrant visa ineligibility under this specific provision.
No routine INA 212(d)(3)(A) waiver for this ground
A nonimmigrant waiver of the stowaway provision ordinarily is not the issue in consular processing because the provision does not apply there.
Separate nonimmigrant issues can remain
A prior removal, material misrepresentation or other ground may call for its own waiver assessment, independently of INA 212(a)(6)(D).
Arrival is different from visa issuance
A visa decision cannot eliminate the distinct treatment prescribed by INA 235(a)(2) for a person actually arriving as a stowaway.
Accurate characterization matters
A past event should be evaluated under the correct statutory provision rather than assumed to require an unnecessary stowaway waiver.
07 / ILLUSTRATIVE SCENARIOS
Examples that turn on precise facts
These hypothetical examples show why a careful legal classification matters; none predicts a particular outcome.
Passenger with a valid ticket
A traveler boarded an airplane with a valid ticket but was later accused of hiding after landing. The statutory valid ticket exclusion is important.
Person concealed in a cargo compartment
An individual secretly obtained transportation aboard a vessel without required consent. The described facts may support a stowaway classification at arrival.
Past stowaway, future family visa
Years after an incident, a person seeks an immigrant visa. INA 212(a)(6)(D) does not itself apply at the consular application, although any earlier removal must be assessed.
Carrier record is inaccurate
A manifest incorrectly indicates there was no passenger ticket. Reliable ticket and boarding records may undermine an improper stowaway designation.
Unauthorized border crossing by land
A person entered by land without inspection. This does not make the individual a stowaway under the vessel or aircraft concealment definition.
Fear expressed at arrival
An arriving stowaway raises fear of persecution. INA 235(a)(2) contains a specific credible fear screening framework notwithstanding the admission restrictions.
08 / FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
INA 212(a)(6)(D): frequently asked questions
The five original questions are preserved exactly, with additional questions about the definition, arriving stowaways, challenges and subsequent visa eligibility.
What is INA 212a6D?
INA 212(a)(6)(D) declares a person who is a stowaway inadmissible. The statutory definition and special treatment under INA 235(a)(2) focus on a person arriving aboard a vessel or aircraft after concealed transportation without the required consent.
Is INA 212(a)(6)(D) decided at a visa interview?
Not ordinarily. The State Department explains that the stowaway ground is not applicable at the time of a visa application because it concerns someone arriving as a stowaway. Separate immigration grounds may nonetheless warrant review.
What is a “stowaway” under immigration law?
INA 101(a)(49) describes transportation through concealment aboard a vessel or aircraft without the consent of the owner, charterer, master or person in command. A passenger who boards with a valid ticket is expressly excluded.
Can INA 212a6D be waived?
There is no ordinary immigrant or nonimmigrant visa waiver needed for this ground at visa application, where it does not apply. An arriving stowaway instead confronts the distinct statutory restrictions in INA 235(a)(2); other grounds require separate assessment.
What should I do if CBP classifies someone as a stowaway?
Because the consequences of classification at arrival can be immediate and serious, immigration counsel should evaluate the factual basis of concealment and consent, the passenger records, the applicable statutory definition and any protection related concerns.
Does a prior stowaway incident automatically bar a future visa?
No. 9 FAM 302.9-6 expressly states that having been a stowaway previously does not by itself make an applicant ineligible for a future visa. Any removal order or independent inadmissibility grounds must be considered separately.
Does the statute cover ships and airplanes?
Yes. INA 101(a)(49) covers concealed transportation aboard either a vessel or aircraft. The same definition governs the analysis of an arriving stowaway.
Is entering without inspection the same as being a stowaway?
No. INA 212(a)(6)(A) addresses presence without admission or parole or arrival at an unauthorized time or place. The stowaway definition specifically requires transportation by vessel or aircraft through concealment without the required consent.
Can someone with a valid ticket be considered a stowaway?
Not under the INA 101(a)(49) definition. The statute expressly states that a passenger who boards with a valid ticket is not to be considered a stowaway. Other immigration issues may still exist.
Does traveling without a ticket always make someone a stowaway?
No. Lack of a ticket alone does not establish every statutory element. The facts must support transportation by concealment aboard a vessel or aircraft without the required consent.
Does unauthorized travel by a crew member automatically qualify?
Not necessarily. The record must establish the actual statutory criteria. Crew status or unauthorized movement alone should not substitute for a finding of concealed transportation without the required consent.
Why does consent matter?
The statute identifies the persons whose consent is legally relevant: the owner, charterer, master or person in command. Records about permission, boarding and transportation can be central to a disputed classification.
What does concealment mean?
Concealment is an element of the statutory definition, not merely a label for improper documentation. A classification should be supported by reliable evidence that the individual obtained the transportation through concealment.
Can a stowaway seek admission at the port?
INA 235(a)(2) states that an arriving stowaway is not eligible to apply for admission or be admitted and is subject to a special removal process. The statute also protects qualifying fear based referrals.
Does an arriving stowaway receive an ordinary INA 240 hearing?
Generally no. INA 235(a)(2) excludes an arriving stowaway from an ordinary INA 240 removal hearing. The limited protection framework is separate from routine removal proceedings.
Can an arriving stowaway seek asylum?
The statute provides for referral when a stowaway expresses an intention to apply for asylum or a fear of persecution. Asylum consideration is subject to the credible fear requirement and other applicable law.
What role does credible fear play?
INA 235(a)(2) connects potential asylum consideration to a credible fear determination under INA 235(b)(1)(B). This protection does not itself confer admission or erase the stowaway designation.
Is a fear of return irrelevant because the person was a stowaway?
No. INA 235(a)(2) expressly contemplates a protection related referral for a person who raises asylum or persecution fears, even though routine admission and hearing rights are restricted.
Is an immigrant visa waiver under INA 212(i) appropriate?
No. INA 212(i) addresses specified fraud or material misrepresentation inadmissibility under INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i), not the stowaway ground under INA 212(a)(6)(D).
Does INA 212(k) waive stowaway inadmissibility?
No. INA 212(k) does not provide a general waiver for this ground. The fundamental distinction is between arriving as a stowaway and a later visa application where INA 212(a)(6)(D) is not applicable.
Is an INA 212(d)(3)(A) nonimmigrant waiver normally needed?
No, not for INA 212(a)(6)(D) at the nonimmigrant visa application stage. 9 FAM 305.3-9(E) says this ground does not apply then. A separate ground may call for its own nonimmigrant waiver analysis.
Can a previous removal affect a later visa?
Yes. Even if a past stowaway incident itself is not a later visa bar under INA 212(a)(6)(D), a prior removal may trigger separate inadmissibility under INA 212(a)(9)(A), depending on the record.
Can unlawful presence create a separate problem?
Yes. INA 212(a)(9)(B) and other provisions can arise from separate facts. A prior stowaway incident does not resolve those independent questions.
What if CBP records incorrectly describe how the person boarded?
A classification based on an inaccurate passenger manifest, boarding record, officer report or account of concealment can warrant legal challenge. The inquiry concerns whether the statutory elements are supported by the full record.
Can a stowaway classification be challenged or reconsidered?
Yes. Attorney review may identify factual errors, missing evidence of concealment, documented authorization, a valid ticket or a misapplication of INA 101(a)(49). Whether reconsideration is available depends on the agency and procedural setting.
Does a CBP stowaway finding automatically prove fraud?
No. Fraud or material misrepresentation under INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) requires its own legal elements. The government should not treat different statutory grounds as interchangeable.
What if someone was mistakenly described as a stowaway years ago?
The historical record may merit correction for accuracy. Under 9 FAM 302.9-6, even a true historical incident alone does not render someone ineligible for a subsequent visa under this ground.
Can a US citizen family member eliminate the stowaway finding?
No family relationship automatically eliminates a supported current stowaway classification. A family based immigrant petition and all independent admissibility questions are separate inquiries.
How does the INA 235(a)(2) rule differ from standard expedited removal?
Congress enacted a specific treatment for arriving stowaways in INA 235(a)(2), including limited access to asylum related screening. It should not be conflated with every removal process or later visa adjudication.
How can The Messersmith Law Firm assist?
Our attorneys assess the statutory definition, passenger and carrier records, CBP findings, prior removal history, possible legal errors and protection issues, while separately evaluating later visa eligibility.
09 / LEGAL AUTHORITIES
Statutory authority and agency guidance
The governing statute, regulation and State Department guidance clarify why arriving stowaways and historical incidents require different legal treatment.
THE MESSERSMITH LAW FIRM, P.A.
Was the stowaway designation legally justified?
Our immigration attorneys examine the actual boarding history, carrier and CBP records, prior removal consequences, protection concerns and later visa eligibility to evaluate whether an improper finding should be challenged.
CLIENT TESTIMONIALS
What our clients say.
Clients recognize the firm's careful preparation, responsiveness, and commitment to finding the appropriate legal strategy for their immigration cases.
Throughout the process, Peter was knowledgeable, professional, and straightforward. His assistant, Jen, was also outstanding. She was always patient, responsive, and willing to answer my questions promptly, which made a very stressful immigration process much easier.
Tanzil Rahman
Peter is the best immigration attorney you can ask for. He guided me through the entire employment-based green card process, from the EB-2 NIW petition to receiving my green card.
Zach Zach
Peter and Jen are very reachable and patient. They are detail-oriented and very knowledgeable. I really enjoy working with them! If you choose them, you will be in good hands.
Andersen Du
From the very outset, Mr. Messersmith and his team exhibited a level of professionalism and dedication that exceeded my expectations.
aldrick boothe
I found Peter online but I have to say I’m so lucky to find Peter as my immigration lawyer. He is the best lawyer I’ve met before.
Tingjunshen Shen
Peter and his team helped me get approved for both an NIW and EB1A (extra ordinary ability), which ultimately led to a green card.
Chainomi Fregene
We had a great experience working with Peter, he supported me and the family through the EB 1 and I 485 application process.
Suleman Sule
His team has fast and quick communication - typically you will get a response in 1 business day
XULI XIAO
Peter assisted me in filing a waiver in order to reapply for a student visa into the US. He was very knowledgeable about the different laws and procedures, and could always answer all of my many questions.
Marta Paiva de Sousa
I am writing to express my deepest gratitude for the exceptional legal representation and support you provided during the challenging process of resolving the issue with my H-4 visa application.
Mounica Sri
Peter and his expert team helped me to take care of my wife's immigration case. They were super valuable, helpful, kind, and caring people.
Sina Rafati
Peter and team helped me get EB1A approved. Most of the lawyers I contacted would say my case is hard for EB1A, but Peter reviewed my CV and rightly advised during each step of the EB1 process. He also filed my NIW which got approved too.
Vinay Boddula
Mr. Messersmith is very knowledgeable and methodical, and can work on cases that are complicated and not necessarily normal.
Nomad traveller
The Messersmith Law Firm is one of the finest law firm in the US.
MAHANTH M
Very professional and helpful. Messersmith Law Firm are the best Immigration Lawyers. Peter is very helpful and guides you all the way in all the documentation and filing.
Naveen Singh
He is quite professional and gave me a lot of advice.
Yoli Lin Du
Mr. Messersmith is the most excellent lawyer I have ever experienced, he has successfully helped me in three of my legal cases, I really appreciate it.
Isabella Zhao
Very experienced to help me and my family successfully got the permanent resident cards, it's a good choice.
Zhu Jintao
Best immigration attorney!
haoxun li
I liked Peter's calm, honest, and balanced approach to our very difficult immigration problem.
Alex
Went very smoothly. Very fast responses to my inquiries. Always sent me an email when a status would change.
Lukas
Peter is great. I found him online and scheduled an interview with him, letting him review my CV.
Linlin
The office of Mr. Peter did a great job preparing and submitting my application for a green card.
George
He was very quick to response and he explains everything clearly. He even checked my recommendation letters!
Mikhail F
Extremely intelligent and committed team, highly effective, efficient and there to stand by you when you need them most.
Samvith
These selected testimonials reflect individual client experiences. Results vary according to the facts and circumstances of each matter.
INA 212(a)(6)(D) · STOWAWAY INADMISSIBILITY
A past incident and an arriving stowaway are not the same legal question.
Accurate legal classification can prevent an unsupported finding from shaping an immigration case. We review the evidence and related grounds with attention to the applicable statutes and available challenges.