Borders, boycotts and the World Cup: why some travellers in 2026 view a trip to the US differently
As the United States, Canada and Mexico prepare for the 2026 World Cup, the biggest football tournament in history is also entering a completely different political and social context from the one that prevailed when the hosting rights were awarded. Instead of a simple story about a global sporting spectacle, organisers and travellers are facing a more complex picture in which the hosts’ high expectations, tighter security measures, stricter rules for entry into the US, the sensitivity of human rights issues and growing uncertainty among some international fans are intertwined. This applies especially to European travellers, who traditionally make up an important segment of transatlantic arrivals, but who today are increasingly assessing not only the price of flights and accommodation, but also the risk of unpleasantness at the border, rules related to documents and the general sense of being welcome.
At the level of sport and tourism, 2026 was supposed to be the year of a strong American return to the global stage. FIFA has confirmed that the tournament will be played from 11 June to 19 July 2026, with an expanded format of 48 national teams and a total of 104 matches in 16 host cities spread across three countries. In the US alone, matches will be played in Atlanta, Boston, Dallas, Houston, Kansas City, Los Angeles, Miami, New York/New Jersey, Philadelphia, Seattle and the San Francisco Bay Area. In terms of organisational scale, this is an event that goes beyond sport: the tournament is expected to trigger a strong wave of international arrivals, fill hotels, airports, rail routes and urban transport, while at the same time testing the capacities of the American border and consular system.
Why travel to the US has become a political and personal issue
For a large number of fans, travelling to the World Cup is not just a logistical issue, but also an assessment of personal safety, legal predictability and the social climate in the host country. In recent months, particular attention has intensified regarding the way US authorities enforce entry rules. Official guidance from the British government warns that US authorities strictly enforce immigration rules, that travellers may be detained, refused or deported if they do not meet the entry requirements, and that neither a valid ESTA authorisation nor a visa in itself guarantees entry into the country. The same guidance also stresses that officers may inspect electronic devices, messages and other digital content, and that refusal to cooperate may lead to delays or a ban on entry.
Such warnings have not remained merely theoretical. During 2025, there were several media-documented cases of European travellers who claimed they had been detained at US borders for days or weeks, after which the European public began asking whether the rules had become stricter or whether only the visibility of individual cases had increased. The effect of such stories goes beyond the people who experienced them: for future visitors, they create the impression that even a properly planned tourist trip can turn into an uncertain administrative and security problem. That is precisely why the question of crossing the border for the 2026 World Cup is no longer a technical footnote, but one of the key factors in deciding whether someone will go to the US at all.
Additional weight is given to the entire issue by the fact that the rules may differ depending on nationality, the type of document and the mode of travel. Citizens of many European countries can travel to the US under the Visa Waiver Program, but even under that regime prior travel authorisation does not mean automatic entry. The final decision is made by US border officers at the point of entry. For travellers, this means that good preparation is no longer just a recommendation, but a prerequisite: from the accuracy of the information and the consistency of the purpose of travel with the documents to a clear plan of stay and reservations that can support the reason for arrival.
The World Cup as a huge tourism boost, but also a test of the system
On the other hand, the economic and tourism logic suggests that the tournament should be a major gain for the US. Oxford Economics, citing projections by Tourism Economics, estimates that the championship could attract around 1.24 million international visitors, of whom approximately 742 thousand would be additional arrivals that would not have happened without the tournament. This estimate shows how important the World Cup is not only for FIFA and the host cities, but also for the American tourism industry, which sees 2026 as an opportunity to recover international traffic after a weaker period. The U.S. Travel Association states that international inbound traffic weakened in 2025, while new growth is expected in 2026, precisely with the help of events such as the World Cup and other major manifestations.
But this is where the main contradiction of this story arises. While the tourism sector is counting on millions of guests and enormous spending, those same visitors are faced with messages that they must plan earlier than before, carefully monitor entry requirements and count on strict enforcement of the rules. In a special guide for the World Cup, the British government warns that US host cities and other tourist destinations will be significantly busier than usual, that demand for accommodation will be very high and that local rules and restrictions will vary from state to state. These warnings do not amount to a call for a boycott, but they clearly show that organisers and foreign governments expect a strained system in which spontaneous travel is becoming less and less feasible.
Precisely because of that, 2026 is no longer just the year of a sporting spectacle, but also a major operational test for American institutions. If the system functions smoothly, the World Cup could help improve America’s image in international tourism. If, however, fans encounter lengthy checks, uneven interpretations of the rules or communication chaos, each individual incident could be amplified many times over on social media and further fuel the impression that travel to the US is unpredictable.
Visa, ESTA and a new level of uncertainty
In recent months, the US State Department has openly said that those who need a visa should not wait, but should begin the process as early as possible. The official pages on visas for the 2026 World Cup state that now is the time to apply if the traveller does not yet have a valid US visa. At the same time, the Department of State regularly publishes global interview wait times for nonimmigrant visas and warns that these times differ from consulate to consulate and that the data are updated monthly. For fans from countries outside the visa-free regime programme, this is a very concrete signal: a match ticket is not worth much if the administrative procedure is not started early enough.
US authorities have tried to ease some of that pressure by introducing the FIFA PASS system, which, according to the State Department’s official explanation, allows ticket buyers to apply for a priority B1/B2 visa interview appointment before the start of the tournament. But that system also shows that the problem is real. When a state establishes a special channel in advance to speed up appointments, it is practically admitting that the standard process for some fans could be too slow or uncertain. In other words, for some the World Cup is a reason to speed up procedures, and for others it is proof that without additional mechanisms the system might not withstand increased pressure.
A particularly sensitive issue has also become the expansion of more restrictive measures toward nationals of certain countries. At the beginning of 2026, the State Department announced that, in accordance with a presidential proclamation that came into force on 1 January 2026, the US had introduced a full or partial suspension of entry and visa issuance for nationals of a total of 39 countries, with limited exceptions. An important detail is that exceptions exist for participants in certain major sporting events, which means that athletes and official delegations receive special treatment, but this does not automatically apply to fans as well. For audiences from the affected countries, this creates a sense of a double standard: the tournament is globally promoted as open and universal, while at the same time some potential visitors face additional political and administrative barriers.
Human rights, LGBT travellers and differences among federal states
One of the reasons why European and other international travellers are weighing a trip to the US differently is also the fact that safety and the legal situation cannot be assessed only at the national level. Official British advice explicitly states that laws differ among US federal states and that LGBT travellers should check state and local rules for the areas to which they are travelling. This is an important message because the World Cup is not concentrated in one city, but spread throughout the entire country. A fan can travel in a few days from Los Angeles to Dallas or from New York to Miami, and in doing so also crosses between different legal and social environments.
For some travellers, especially transgender and non-binary people, the issue of the consistency of travel documents, sex markers and treatment at the border has become more than an administrative formality. In recent months, European media and NGO circles have increasingly debated how predictable US rules and practice are for people whose identity or documents may raise additional questions during checks. Although the official guidance of different states is not identical, their common denominator is a call for additional verification before travelling. This does not mean that travel is impossible, but it does mean that some fans in 2026 are planning their trip with far more caution than was the case a few years ago.
It is precisely this level of uncertainty that feeds the idea of a kind of silent boycott or at least a selective decision not to travel to the US. These are rarely formal boycott campaigns in the classic political sense. Much more often, these are individual decisions: a fan who would otherwise buy a ticket for two matches in the US decides to stay in Europe, choose the broadcast in front of a screen or, if possible, direct the trip toward Canada and Mexico. Such decisions are difficult to measure precisely in real time, but they gradually change the mood in the travel market.
Europe between football euphoria and a feeling of unease
European travellers are not a homogeneous group in this regard. For some, going to the World Cup will still be the trip of a lifetime, regardless of the political context. For others, especially families with children, younger travellers with limited budgets and people who belong to more vulnerable groups, additional unpredictability easily tips the balance toward giving up. Practical reasons also play a role: the prices of flights and accommodation, the distance between host cities, possible multiple checks upon entry, and the fact that a large part of the tournament in the US will be concentrated in larger, more expensive urban centres.
At the same time, global tourism trends show that international travel is generally growing. UN Tourism reported that international tourist arrivals in 2025 increased by 4 percent and reached around 1.52 billion trips. That is precisely why the American situation stands out in particular: while global travel is growing, the American tourism sector is at the same time talking about the need to return international arrivals to a stronger upward path. In such circumstances, the World Cup becomes a great opportunity, but also a kind of referendum on whether the country can attract guests not only through infrastructure and spectacle, but also through a sense of legal security.
That is why discussions about the 2026 World Cup are increasingly no longer only about stadiums, the draw and the atmosphere among fans, but more and more about borders, documents and the messages the state sends to the world. If an international visitor assesses that the risk is too great, the attractiveness of the match itself may no longer be decisive. And in tourism, impression is often almost as important as actual experience. A country that wants to host millions of people competes not only with the quality of its stadiums, but also with the predictability of the process from buying a ticket to passing through border control.
Can local hospitality and the sporting atmosphere outweigh a bad impression
For American host cities, the greatest challenge is that they do not have full control over all the elements that shape international perception. Local tourist boards, hotels, restaurants and organising committees can build a message of welcome, invest in transport, fan zones and security, but they do not decide on visa issuance rules or on what practice at the border will look like. This is precisely where the gap arises between local openness and national strictness. A visitor may simultaneously believe that Seattle, New York or Los Angeles will welcome them warmly, and yet still abandon the trip for fear of what will happen upon entry into the country.
Nor should the possibility that the picture may change for the better be overlooked. Major sporting events often act as a corrective and an accelerator of institutional adjustment. If US authorities ensure clear information, more predictable procedures and sufficient consular capacity, some of the current unease could be alleviated. Supporting this is also the fact that official British and American websites are already publishing special instructions for fans, deadlines, entry rules and travel planning advice. This shows that institutions recognise the problem and are trying to address it before the tournament begins.
Nevertheless, the fundamental question remains the same: will the 2026 World Cup be a celebration of openness or a mirror of growing closedness? The answer will probably not be unambiguous. For millions of fans, the tournament will still be an unforgettable experience and an opportunity to combine sport, tourism and an encounter with different parts of North America in a single trip. But for a significant number of others, especially those who follow the political climate, border practices and debates on minority rights, a trip to the US is no longer a self-evident choice, but a carefully weighed decision. It is precisely in this change of perception that the real story of the 2026 World Cup lies: the stadiums are ready for spectacle, but the question is how ready the world is to cross the border without hesitation.
Sources:
- FIFA – official overview of host cities, tournament dates and basic information about the 2026 World Cup.
- FIFA – official competition schedule with a total of 104 matches and host cities.
- GOV.UK – official British guidance on entry requirements for the US, the risk of detention, refusal of entry and inspections of electronic devices.
- GOV.UK – official safety advice, including notes on differences among federal states and recommendations for LGBT travellers.
- GOV.UK – a special guide to travel for the 2026 World Cup, with dates, US host cities and advice for planning accommodation and transport.
- U.S. Department of State – official overview of global wait times for nonimmigrant visa interviews.
- U.S. Department of State – explanation of the suspension of visa issuance and entry restrictions for nationals of some countries from 1 January 2026, including the listed exceptions for certain major sporting events.
- Travel.State.Gov – official information that a visa in itself does not guarantee entry into the United States.
- U.S. Customs and Border Protection – official information for international visitors, including clarification that ESTA does not determine final admissibility for entry.
- U.S. Customs and Border Protection – overview of the Visa Waiver Program and a list of the basic rules for visa-free tourist travel.
- U.S. Travel Association – forecast for the American tourism sector with expectations of growth in international arrivals in 2026 under the influence of the World Cup.
- U.S. Travel Association – overview of developments in the American tourism sector with a note that international inbound traffic remained weaker at the beginning of 2026.
- Oxford Economics / Tourism Economics – estimate of the number of international visitors that the World Cup could bring to the US and the economic effect for tourism.
- UN Tourism – international tourism trends and growth in global arrivals in 2025.
- Associated Press – report on cases of European travellers being detained at US borders and reactions in the European public.
RECOMMENDED ACCOMMODATION