Is the US safe for immigrants?
-
Canadian Supreme Court to decide:
At the heart of the matter is the Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA) - a pact between the two countries in place since 2004 that requires refugee claimants to request protection in the first "safe" country they reach.
Campaigners in Canada have long argued that the STCA should be struck down on the grounds that migrants are at risk of mistreatment in the US and that the agreement violates their constitutional rights.
On Thursday, Canada's Supreme Court judges questioned if there was enough evidence to suggest widespread systemic issues in how the US treats migrants that would deem the agreement unconstitutional.
In response, refugee lawyers argued the detainment of some migrants is quick and inhumane, and violates the "right, liberty and security of the person" as outlined by Canada's charter.
Refugee lawyers and advocates say some of migrants sent back were imprisoned in "freezing cold" detention centres or subject to solitary confinement.
Meanwhile, lawyers for the Canadian government argued the US is a democratic country that has a robust and fair system for processing asylum claims.
Experts say the outcome of the case could also determine the future of "irregular" land crossings into Canada, which reached a record high this year.
Canada and the US share a 5,525 mile (8,891 km) border - the longest between two countries in the world.
The STCA was put in place to better manage refugee claims at the US-Canada land border and to avoid asylum seekers making claims in multiple countries, or so-called "asylum shopping".
The agreement applies to almost all refugee claimants coming through the US, except if they have a family member in Canada or if they are an unaccompanied minor.Fly 'em from
Martha's VineyardNew York to Toronto! -
Canadian Supreme Court to decide:
At the heart of the matter is the Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA) - a pact between the two countries in place since 2004 that requires refugee claimants to request protection in the first "safe" country they reach.
Campaigners in Canada have long argued that the STCA should be struck down on the grounds that migrants are at risk of mistreatment in the US and that the agreement violates their constitutional rights.
On Thursday, Canada's Supreme Court judges questioned if there was enough evidence to suggest widespread systemic issues in how the US treats migrants that would deem the agreement unconstitutional.
In response, refugee lawyers argued the detainment of some migrants is quick and inhumane, and violates the "right, liberty and security of the person" as outlined by Canada's charter.
Refugee lawyers and advocates say some of migrants sent back were imprisoned in "freezing cold" detention centres or subject to solitary confinement.
Meanwhile, lawyers for the Canadian government argued the US is a democratic country that has a robust and fair system for processing asylum claims.
Experts say the outcome of the case could also determine the future of "irregular" land crossings into Canada, which reached a record high this year.
Canada and the US share a 5,525 mile (8,891 km) border - the longest between two countries in the world.
The STCA was put in place to better manage refugee claims at the US-Canada land border and to avoid asylum seekers making claims in multiple countries, or so-called "asylum shopping".
The agreement applies to almost all refugee claimants coming through the US, except if they have a family member in Canada or if they are an unaccompanied minor.Fly 'em from
Martha's VineyardNew York to Toronto!Sure, see how it shakes out. If CBS refuses entry at the airport it’s the airlines responsibility to return them back to their point of departure from the US. Airlines know this and will probably refuse boarding from the US at the start.
In any case the law in question normally pertains to passengers showing up at a land border. As you can imagine, there are a lot of those.
