10/01/2008

U.S. Travel and Immigration Ban Still in Place for HIV-Positive People

Over the summer, the U.S. approved the Lantos/Hyde U.S. Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act (S 2731) which contained a provision lifting a ban on travel and immigration to the U.S. by those who are HIV-postitive. Apparently there hasn't been any follow-through on the latter half.

Andrew Sullivan writes: "Yesterday, they simply reiterated their previous plans to "streamline" the process, which, in fact, does nothing but make it more bureaucratically cumbersome for temporary visitors with HIV to enter the country as tourists or for conferences. They have done nothing to end the ban as the law clearly asked for."

Under the current guidelines, Sullivan (and many others) would have to leave the U.S. for good in March.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted 12:02 PM EST by Andy in AIDS/HIV, Andrew Sullivan, Immigration, News, Travel | Permalink

---

Like it?

Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!

... or by Email

RECENT STORIES:

• Same-Sex Marriage Supporters Protest at LDS Christmas Kick-off

• Jason Statham: Hypothetical Gay Action Hero

• Boy George on Male Escort: 'I Certainly Wasn't Going to Kill Him'

• News: Mumbai, Pilot Whales, Britney Spears, Scuba, Pregnant Man

• Marc Jacobs Pays Naked Homage to Stephen Sprouse

---

Comments

1. Are you sure about that last part? Isn't Andrew Sullivan a U.S. citizen?

   Posted by: Wil | Oct 1, 2008 2:56:19 PM

   
   

2. My understanding is Sullivan is not a US Citizen because of his HIV status. And as much as I agree that we should end this ban, if keeping the ban means Andrew Sullivan would be shipped back to the UK, it might be worth thinking twice about ending the ban.

   The fact anyone gives him an ounce of credibility is beyond comprehension to me. He has spent weeks railing about how awful Palin is because she has no foreign policy experience and had never left the United States (until last year), yet somehow Sullivan managed to put that aside in 2000 when he voted for Bush/Cheney. Where was the indignation on his part then?

   He's a conservative when it benefits him and a liberal when it benefits him. In any case, it's always about HIM. And it's time gay blogs, newspapers and people stop listening to him. I won't shed a tear if he is send packing to England.

   Posted by: Mitchell | Oct 2, 2008 1:34:32 PM

   
   

Post a comment

Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Remember personal info?

Comments: