Skip to main content
Skeptics

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

6
  • 1
    This is more a question of politics than law.
    – Daniel R Hicks
    Commented Jun 10, 2019 at 19:53
  • 1
    @DanielRHicks the analysis in the Guardian article is a legal analysis, not a political one.
    – phoog
    Commented Jun 10, 2019 at 19:54
  • It's more a question of politics. They would likely make an exception for a nation's leader for political reasons.
    – dont_shog_me_bro
    Commented May 20, 2020 at 15:07
  • Bear in mind that certain people (I'm not saying who) in the US government might use this as an excuse to block some foreign leader from entry to the US. The question is whether they can get away with it.
    – Daniel R Hicks
    Commented May 21, 2020 at 0:10
  • @dont_shog_me_bro it is decidedly not a political question. There is no need to make an exception, as explained in my answer, because there is no basis in US law to deny entry to a head of government on the basis of a history of drug use.
    – phoog
    Commented May 21, 2020 at 5:53