ɫɫ��

The STCA is premised on two core pillars. One is better management of asylum requests by reducing the duplication of claims. The STCA allows Canada to forego evaluating a refugee protection claim and relies on the United States to do so. The same is true of asylum seekers arriving at the U.S. border from Canada. The U.S. relies on Canada to provide protection.

The second pillar is the promotion of family reunification to ensure that families stay together. �ճ����, and��, recognize that family reunification supports refugee self-sufficiency, increasing successful resettlement. The “” provision gives effect to this pillar. Defined as a parent, adult child, sibling, or aunt or uncle, who is a citizen, permanent resident, a refugee or in the refugee protection process in Canada, an anchor relative creates an exemption to the STCA bar, but only if the person presents themselves at the land border.

Even at the time of drafting, the��United Nations Refugee Agency��(UNHCR), and��Canada’s House of Commons Standing Committee on Immigration raised objections about inadequate protections for gender-based asylum claims and the overreliance on detention in the U.S.

In 2025, sharing refugee responsibility with the Trump Administration makes little sense. When Canada returns asylum seekers to the U.S. who do not meet an STCA exemption, they can face detention in deplorable conditions and deportation to persecution. This includes children. Leading Canadian human rights organizations have����

As��long as the STCA remains in effect, however, the current realities demand that both governments update their practices. U.S. detention practices create an unforeseen practical barrier to the operation of the STCA, undermining both its efficiency and family reunification pillars. Asylum seekers are becoming ensnared in the U.S. detention system, even though they were only passing through the U.S. to join family members in Canada. But now they can’t reach the Canadian border: the U.S. won’t release them.

Two recent examples of Afghan nationals detained in Texas are illustrative:

The first is a family — two individuals and their elderly father — who were on their way to Canada to join the man’s wife and other children. They have “anchor relatives” whom Canada has recognized as refugees. One of the asylum seekers worked with the U.S. government during Operation Afghan Freedom, which placed him and his family members at risk of assassination when the Taliban took over, compelling him to flee.

The second is a young Afghan national who was separated from his brother and his pregnant sister-in-law while crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. His two brothers, sister, sister-in-law, mother and father all made their way to Canada and have been found to be refugees. Yet he has been in detention in Texas since September 2024, pleading with both governments to permit reunification.

They are in a legal trap: they planned to enter Canada under the “anchor relatives” regime, but the U.S. won’t release them for this purpose.

Here is a solution.

The U.S. can bring these Afghans to a detention centre close to the Canada-U.S. border, such as Batavia in the Buffalo area. From there, a trusted non-governmental organization can transport them to the border for a pre-arranged appointment at which Canada would be required to admit them under the bilateral treaty. Or, with the stroke of a pen, the Canadian government can issue Temporary Resident Permits to individuals who can prove their eligibility for asylum in Canada under the “anchor relative” exemption and allow them to “deport” straight from detention to Canada.��

The present practice serves no one. Asylum seekers could be safely with their families in Canada and no longer be an issue for the U.S. if they could just access the border. It’s time to recognize that a change in practice will greatly benefit both countries.