As Donald Trump ramps up anti-refugee rhetoric, lessons from how the Holocaust shaped asylum law

In recent days, the Canadian government has shown the first signs of how it will respond to Donald Trump’s efforts to turn migration into a border security and enforcement issue.

Speaking to the media after a recent dinner at the president-elect’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Public Safety Minister Dominic Leblanc indicated the need “for the Americans and for Canadians to see that the border is secure”.

In tying the border to security, Leblanc made no attempt to correct the mistaken and flawed assumptions about global migration underpinning Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric, nor did he defend the legal right of people in danger to seek asylum.

This early response to Trump’s second term is worrisome on several levels, most notably because no conversation about border controls should begin at the border.

Instead, discussions about managing and responding to migration must consider the profound root causes that compel people to contemplate where, when and how to move. Those include systemic inequalities and environmental degradation.

International conventions

Canada’s initial response to Trump’s threat of 25% cent tariffs on all Canadian and Mexican imports to the United States “until such time as Drugs, in particular Fentanyl, and all Illegal Aliens stop this Invasion of our Country!” violates international human rights principles and international refugee law.

The federal government should therefore reverse course and adhere to conventions...

Read more