The Canadian government has proposed emergency measures to tighten asylum rules that officials say are needed to protect the integrity of the country's refugee system, measures that could affect hundreds of U.S. citizens who crossed the border seeking refuge after the recent U.S. election.
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) said the changes are part of Bill C-2, which includes the Strong Borders Act and which Ottawa intends to use to modernize migration and strengthen “migration integrity.” An IRCC spokesman, Matthew Krupovich, said the government is proposing new ineligibilities and other authorities to prevent what he called misuse of the asylum system and added, “Canada's asylum system is not a shortcut to immigration.”
The proposed rules would bar some people who have lived in Canada for more than a year, including international students, from claiming asylum and would limit referrals to the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) for those who enter from the United States and file a claim more than 14 days after arrival. Ottawa says the measures could be applied retrospectively, which legal experts say would increase the risk of deportation for people who have already filed claims.
IRCC statistics cited by the ministry show 544 people were intercepted at land border crossings between January and April of this year, of whom 455 were U.S. citizens. Officials and lawmakers have framed the measures as responses to rising applications and a backlog in the refugee system that the government says needs to be addressed.
The government estimates the current backlog at roughly 280,000 claims and says it processes about 80,000 claims a year. Critics say that backlog creates delays — some claims can take years to reach a first hearing — and that restricting access risks denying protection to people who might face persecution.
Immigration Minister Lena Metlege Diab defended the proposal, saying the country must “act fairly” while managing the increase in applications and ensure a system that works for Canadians and asylum seekers. The bill would also expand powers for officials to cancel, suspend or change immigration documents, stop accepting new applications in certain circumstances, speed voluntary departures and require that only people physically in Canada appear before the IRB, the government said. It would also provide representation for minors and a pre-removal risk assessment for those facing deportation, a process the IRCC says prevents returns to danger.
Legal scholars and refugee advocates described the measures as significant restrictions that could curtail access to hearings and undermine Canada's asylum obligations. Anna Triandafyllidou, a migration scholar at Toronto Metropolitan University, said the bill amounts to an effort to change how the Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA) functions without formally amending it. STCA generally requires some asylum seekers who pass through the United States to pursue protection there first; the agreement does not apply to U.S. citizens claiming asylum in Canada.
Constance MacIntosh, a law professor at Dalhousie University, said the bill risks preventing people from having their day in court and could push asylum seekers underground, increasing vulnerability to exploitation. Amnesty International Canada called the proposals “an attack on refugees’ rights to seek asylum,” saying at least one provision could make it effectively impossible for some claims to be heard by the IRB.
Alex Stojicevic, an immigration lawyer and former chair of the Canadian Bar Association's National Immigration Law Section, said the CBA opposes several elements of the bill, including the government’s power to cancel applications and time-based bars that create what he called “two tiers of rights.” He noted that historically successful asylum claims by U.S. citizens are rare: outside wartime, only four American claimants have been granted protection in Canada, three of them minors.
Advocates and some asylum seekers who have publicly described crossing the border say they left the United States fearing for the safety of family members after the reelection of former President Donald Trump. The Daily Mail reported interviews with people who said concerns included federal policies on transgender rights and other civil liberties. Those accounts have been cited by legal advocates as part of a broader question over whether Canada should expand protections or further limit access.
Parliamentary consideration of Bill C-2 is underway and the legislation is at second reading. The government has framed the package as necessary to restore balance and manage flows of people entering the country amid changing global migration patterns. Opponents in Parliament and in civil society have said the measures would undermine refugee protections and could invite legal challenges.
The proposal comes as officials note Canada has accepted U.S. asylum seekers in the past under different circumstances, citing the Vietnam War era when draft resisters entered Canada. Government officials and legal experts differ on whether Canada might change its approach again as political tensions in the United States evolve.
If passed, the bill would implement immediate changes to how many asylum claims are screened and processed and give the federal government new authorities to limit pathways to refugee protection. Critics say that without additional resources to the refugee determination system, measures that restrict access risk leaving vulnerable people without recourse and increasing pressure on those waiting in limbo. Supporters argue the measures are needed to prevent strain on services and to preserve fairness for those already in the queue.
Parliamentary debate and committee review are expected to shape the final form of the legislation, and rights groups have signaled they will continue to monitor and challenge provisions they say are inconsistent with Canada's international obligations to protect people fleeing persecution.