As the Trump Administration cracks down on illegal immigration in the U.S., immigrants have been crossing the border into Canada. In 2016, 1,222 immigrants fled the U.S. to Quebec alone–a fivefold increase from prior years–and there have been similar spikes in British Columbia.

Stories of frostbitten immigrants crossing into remote, unmarked border towns this winter garnered international attention and set conservative Canadians on the warpath, demanding stricter regulation of the border. But the rise of illegal immigration has also led to calls for alterations to (and even the repeal of) the Safe Third Country Agreement, which states that refugees must apply for asylum in the first country they arrive in. Many immigrants who were hoping to seek shelter in the U.S. are crossing into Canada illegally because they believe their asylum claims will be denied in the U.S. but upheld in Canada. If the act was repealed or suspended, immigrants could request asylum at official border crossings and enter the country legally.

In the Justin Trudeau era, Americans tend to glamorize Canada as the last moral outpost on the continent but the nation is not quite the united front we assume it to be. According to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released this week, nearly half of respondents want to send illegal immigrants crossing the Canadian border back to the U.S. and a similar number of respondents disapprove of how the government is handling illegal immigration. The subsets that were most in favor of deportation were men, adults without a college degree, higher income individuals, and older individuals. This is by no means a perfect representation of Canadian attitudes. Yet in an era where xenophobia is encouraged and even enshrined by executive orders, it’s important to keep an eye on shifts in public opinion.

The U.S.-Canada border has historically been a “soft” one but as illegal immigration rates climb, Canada appears to be moving slowly toward a more hardline stance. Trudeau has defended proposed legislation that would allow U.S. customs agents to question, search, and detain Canadians on Canadian soil. Trudeau publicly stated in February that the government would not take steps to quell irregular migration–yet by giving more power to U.S. customs agents, he is essentially passing the buck. Policing the border is a cooperative effort between the two countries and if Trudeau steps away from that responsibility, he will be enabling the Trump Administration.

Trudeau met with Trump earlier this year in a carefully coordinated encounter that let Trudeau hold strong on all of his positions without actively attacking Trump. While it is diplomatic common sense not to antagonize an ally, Trudeau could take a stronger stand against the Trump Administration through legislative action–such as scrapping the Safe Third Country Agreement. Trudeau has done outstanding work with the Syrian refugee population, striving to fast-track their entry into Canada so that tens of thousands of Syrian refugees have now been granted asylum in Canada–but can he keep it up?

Jillian Sequeira

Jillian Sequeira was a member of the College of William and Mary Class of 2016, with a double major in Government and Italian. When she’s not blogging, she’s photographing graffiti around the world and worshiping at the altar of Elon Musk and all things Tesla. Contact Jillian at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post The Other Border: Pushback Against Illegal Immigration in Canada appeared first on Law Street.

Cuban migrants landing on American soil without visas will no longer be afforded special treatment over migrants from other countries, President Barack Obama announced on Thursday. In eliminating the 22-year-old “wet foot, dry foot” policy, Obama made what will likely be his final move in his quest to normalize relations with the Cuban government, which has wanted the U.S. to do away with the policy for years.

The “wet foot, dry foot” policy, a 1995 revision to the 1966 Cuban Adjustment Act, essentially allowed Cuban migrants who reached U.S. soil to stay, with or without a visa; the migrants could also apply for permanent residency. The policy favored Cuban migrants over those who fled other countries. Throughout the past few decades, tens of thousands of Cubans have taken advantage of the favorable treatment.

“By taking this step, we are treating Cuban migrants the same way we treat migrants from other countries,” Obama said in a statement. “With this change we will continue to welcome Cubans as we welcome immigrants from other nations, consistent with our laws.” Obama said the change is effective immediately, and that the Cuban government has agreed “to accept the return of Cuban nationals who have been ordered removed, just as it has been accepting the return of migrants interdicted at sea.”

At the moment, the Cuban government does not permit migrants who have been away from the country for four years or more to return. Ben Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security adviser, said Cuban officials have already agreed to repeal that law, and will allow nearly 3,000 Cubans who fled to the U.S. as part of the Mariel boat-lift of 1980 to re-enter Cuba.

Not everybody was thrilled with Obama’s decision. Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) said dropping the “wet foot, dry foot” policy will “tighten the noose the Castro regime continues to have around the neck of its own people.” Menendez, who is a also a senior member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, added: “The fact is the recent ill-conceived changes in American policy towards Cuba have rewarded the regime with an economic lifeline while leaving every day Cubans less hopeful about their futures under a brutal totalitarian dictatorship.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Obama Ends Special Asylum Rule for Cuban Migrants appeared first on Law Street.

The Senate passed a measure on Thursday that will renew the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program, designed to provide asylum for Afghan translators and interpreters who assisted U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. Attached to a larger bill–the National Defense Authorization Act–the measure added 1,500 additional visas to the program, which lawmakers from both parties and military officials traditionally support.

Though it easily passed by a vote of 92-7, lawmakers have been at odds during the past few months over the specifics of the measure, including how many visas should be added, and how much it would cost. Earlier this year, President Obama requested 4,000 applicants be added to the program, though the measure missed that mark by 2,500 visas. There are currently 13,000 pending applications from sanctuary-seekers.

Since U.S. troops invaded Afghanistan in October 2001, thousands of Afghans have assisted troops as translators and interpreters. Many face threats when they return home, from the Taliban–which remains a force in the country–other extremist groups, or even from their neighbors who may view them as traitors. The SIV program provides sanctuary for Afghan nationals who were employed for at least two years on behalf of the U.S. military, and who experience an “ongoing serious threat as a consequence of such employment.”

In August, Senator John McCain (R-AZ), a vocal proponent of the program, offered a blunt warning on the Senate floor: “People are going to die,” he said to a fellow Republican who wanted to block more visas from being added to the program. “Don’t you understand the gravity of that?”

The program began in 2009 under the Afghan Allies Protection Act, and is traditionally attached as a clause to the annual military bill. This year’s bill, expected to cost $619 billion, also calls for a 2.1 percent wage increase for U.S. troops, the steepest increase since 2010. One lingering question about the SIV program is how President-elect Trump will handle it.

Three of Trump’s cabinet choices thus far are former generals, and the military is a traditional supporter of the program. But more visas would also mean more Muslims in the U.S. Throughout his campaign, Trump often targeted Muslims with harsh rhetoric, and has flirted with banning the entire faith from the country.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Senate Votes to Renew Visa Program for Afghans Who Aided U.S. in Wartime appeared first on Law Street.

The past week in Germany has been rife with bloodshed and full of dread. At four public sites across the country starting last Monday, 10 people have been killed and scores more injured–some critically–in suicide bombings, stabbings, and in one instance, an ax-wielding teenager. On Sunday evening, in the most recent attack on German soil, a 27-year-old Syrian man blew himself up and injured 15 others at a fair in Ansbach, a town 90 miles north of Munich.

As information from the investigation into the attack trickled in on Monday morning, one troubling tidbit came to light: the man, identified by a neighbor as Mohammad Daleel, pledged allegiance to the Islamic State, or ISIS, on a cell phone video shot just moments before he detonated his backpack full of explosives, according to Bavarian Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann.

“I believe that after this video we cannot doubt that this attack was an Islamist terror attack,” Herrmann said. In the video, the suspect says Germans “won’t be able to sleep peacefully anymore,” while describing his impending attack as a “revenge act against Germans because they are standing in the way of Islam.”

In the early stages of the investigation into the attack–the week’s second to take place in the German state of Bavaria–it is unclear whether or not the man had directly communicated with ISIS, or if he had acted of his own accord, inspired by the ideology of the terrorist group. He is the second attacker in Germany this week to voice support for ISIS. The first came last Monday, when a 17-year-old Afghan asylum-seeker attacked people on a subway with an ax, injuring five. The attacker was the incident’s only fatality. 

The week’s attacks reignited the conversation in Germany over its refugee policy. In 2015, Germany absorbed nearly one million migrants, most of which were Muslims from war-torn countries like Syria and Afghanistan. As terrorist attacks have spread around the western world over the past year, far-right movements have gained traction, most of which run on the promise of stricter immigration policies. Three of the four attacks last week in Germany were carried out by asylum-seekers, and calls for less accommodating asylum practices are growing louder. Sunday’s suicide bomber sought asylum in Germany in 2014 but was denied due to his initial asylum request in Bulgaria, where he was to be deported to.

German officials involved in the investigation said the man had attempted suicide twice before and was in a psychiatric clinic at some point. His successful suicide and public attack was embraced by ISIS, who, through their media affiliate Amaq referred to him as a “soldier.” Since 2014, when its caliphate was officially born, ISIS has been directly responsible or has been the inspiration for 2,043 deaths in 29 countries.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Week of Terror: Latest Attacker in Germany a “Soldier” of ISIS appeared first on Law Street.

Edward Snowden finally left Sheremetyevo Airport, where he had been located for nearly 40 days, now that he has been granted asylum in Russia for one year.  After leaking revealing documents about National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance programs, Snowden fled the United States and made it to Russia before the U.S. revoked his passport. Snowden sees his grant of asylum as a victory for the law, which he believes the U.S. had been disrespecting since the leak occurred. Snowden left the airport with Wikileaks reporter Sarah Harrison, whom he has been with since his arrival.

Russia’s recent actions have created diplomatic problems with the United States government, as they have actively tried to get Snowden to return for a proper trial.  According to White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, the Obama administration was “extremely disappointed” with Russia’s decision, continually urging for Snowden’s extradition since his arrival in Russia.

[Politico]

—

Featured image courtesy of [thierry ehrmann via Flickr]

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Snowden Granted Asylum appeared first on Law Street.