In a shocking case, U.S. Customs and Homeland Security has prohibited entry of a mentally ill person to the United States.  This is shocking in that the section of the Immigration and Nationality Act is seldom used to stop the entry of crazy and dangerous people to the United States.  (h/t Instapundit)  Sadly though, Instapundit thinks this is a bad thing.

The Star November 28, 2013 by Valerie Hauch 

Disabled Woman Denied Entry To U.S. After Agent Cites Supposedly Private Medical Details 

Ellen Richardson went to Pearson airport on Monday full of joy about flying to New York City and from there going on a 10-day Caribbean cruise for which she’d paid about $6,000. 

But a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent with the Department of Homeland Security killed that dream when he denied her entry. 

“I was turned away, I was told, because I had a hospitalization in the summer of 2012 for clinical depression,’’ said Richardson, who is a paraplegic and set up her cruise in collaboration with a March of Dimes group of about 12 others. 

The Weston woman was told by the U.S. agent she would have to get “medical clearance’’ and be examined by one of only three doctors in Toronto whose assessments are accepted by Homeland Security. She was given their names and told a call to her psychiatrist “would not suffice.’’

The shocking fact is that section 212(a)(1)(A)(iii), the exclusion charge for mental health problems that represent a threat to the alien or others, was used at all.

 Since the Clinton Administration, the enforcement of that section, as well as the section it was most commonly used in conjunction with(if an alien is mentally ill, they are most likely not able to work and provide for themselves) Section 212(a)(4), Public Charge, has been prohibited by unwritten policy at the legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service and its successors.  

Note also that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services does not consider use of many welfare programs to be evidence of being a public charge and refuses to use welfare dependance of sponsors of immigrants or use by aliens to be evidence of welfare dependance, using a "totality of circumstances" rationale to excuse away use of welfare.

I expect this decision by CBP to be overturned by the Regime quite soon.