Refugee groups challenge Canada's return of asylum seekers to US in Federal Court
Summary
- Canada is before the Federal Court in a long-running constitutional challenge to its Safe Third Country Agreement with the United States.
- The challengers argue the agreement discriminates against women, children, and LGBTQ asylum seekers under Section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
- The agreement, in force since 2004, generally requires asylum seekers to seek protection in the first of the two countries they enter.
- A second lawsuit filed in June 2026 alleges Canada fails to apply safeguards the Supreme Court identified in 2023 against returning people to danger.
- The Canadian government defends the agreement as a way to keep the border orderly, and a further hearing is set for December 16, 2026.
Reactions
- Ketty Nivyabandi of Amnesty International Canada said the United States is not safe for racialized women, children, or LGBTQI+ refugees.
- Canadian Council for Refugees president Asma Faizi said the US asylum system is broken and dangerous and asked the court to strike down the US designation.
- Canadian Council of Churches general secretary Janet Anstead said the treatment of vulnerable people in the US asylum system is antithetical to Christian values.
- Supporters rallied in Toronto and Montreal in the week before publication, with Montreal demonstrators carrying signs reading 'Canada must protect, not send back'.
- Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada said it could not comment on the proceedings but defended the agreement as keeping the border orderly.
Timeline newest first
Sources newest first
- Canada sued over returning migrants to US amid ICE crackdown
newsweek.com· 33h
Newsweek reports that Canada is back in the Federal Court over its policy of returning asylum seekers to the United States, with Amnesty International Canada, the Canadian Council for Refugees, the Canadian Council of Churches, and former claimants arguing the Safe Third Country Agreement discriminates against women, children, and LGBTQ asylum seekers. Refugee groups say people could face ICE detention or deportation to danger, while Canada defends the agreement as keeping the border orderly; supporters also rallied in Toronto and Montreal, and a second constitutional challenge filed in June 2026 is pending.
Background newest first
Supreme Court Set to Hear Trump’s Ban on Asylum Claims at Bordernytimes.com· 25h
The Supreme Court will review the legality of President Trump's ban on asylum claims at the southern border, which lower courts have found illegal but has largely stayed in force. Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the justices their intervention was urgently warranted, while a ruling against the ban is expected to conclude years of litigation.
Immigrants Are Being Systematically Returned Home Despite Court OrdersA New York Times investigation finds the Trump administration's third-country deportation program has pushed more than 110 immigrants with court-ordered protections back to home countries where they risk persecution, torture or death, despite judges barring their return. Mustapha Camara, a Nebraska nurse protected from deportation to Gambia, was arrested anyway, sent to Ghana, and deported there; officials deny responsibility, and human rights groups call the program refoulement by proxy.
gov.uscourts.nysd.676381.21.0.pdf
courtlistener.com
Judge Victor Marrero of the Southern District of New York extends and modifies a temporary restraining order barring the Government from deporting five Afghan nationals — whom Project Rousseau, Inc. says face removal to Pakistan and onward delivery to the Taliban — to Pakistan, Afghanistan, or any third country pending further order, rejecting the Government's jurisdictional objections and finding the alleged failure to follow the Department of Homeland Security's third-country removal guidance likely unlawful. He directs Project Rousseau to amend its complaint, joining the Afghan nationals as plaintiffs and detailing individual facts and venue, by November 9, 2026.
