President Trump has taken arbitrary measures to enforce, fight refugees and fight Muslims, which means we cannot trust that refugees returned to the United States will protect their human rights. The Trudeau government can hope that a change of government in the United States will undermine the case against THE STCA. However, there is no guarantee that Trump will not be re-elected or that a Biden administration would significantly improve the situation of asylum seekers in the United States. More fundamentally, the government`s decision to appeal the decision undermines Canada`s respect for international refugee law and risks stoking the mindset against migrants, which dates back to the scapegoat of Trump and other right-wing politicians. More people are coming because refugees feel insecure in the United States and because there are more refugees in the world. Conventions on safe third-country nationals are not explicitly mentioned in the 1951 Refugee Convention or the 1967 Protocol on the Status of Refugees. Rather, their legitimacy derives from Article 31 of the 1951 Convention, which states that a refugee should not be punished for illegal entry into a country if he arrives directly from a country where he is threatened. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has itself warned against over-interpreting safe third country agreements, although it acknowledges that they may be acceptable in certain circumstances.  Such ambiguities have prompted some Canadian legal experts to question the legality of the Canada-U.S. safe third country agreement.
 To date, the United States is the only country to be designated by Canada as a safe third country under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. On June 28, 2002, 51 years after the United Nations adopted the Convention on Refugee Law, the governments of Canada and the United States announced that they had negotiated the first draft agreement that would limit the rights protected by the Convention. Under the new agreement, refugee claimants seeking Canada`s protection at the U.S.-Canada border would be rejected and forced to assert their rights in the United States. The principle of family reunification should go beyond such an agreement and the applicant`s right to counsel should be established. Persons returned to one country or other countries should only be detained when they pose a threat to safety or the public, and children should only be detained as a last resort. The power of discretion should be used to allow the admission to Canada of the following persons: applicants who are less likely to be accepted in the other country, including those with a right to equality between women and men; Survivors of torture; People who would be arrested if returned to the other country; Applicants with special physical or psychological health needs; People who do not need help in either country; People with connections to the country, including language links, who help with integration; People who are not allowed to assert their rights in the other country.