Quote:
Originally Posted by wave46
For the record, I don't support Trump's ban.
However, I'm confused as to why this would affect pre-clearance. US Customs agents have a large latitude to refuse entry into the country. There is no specific right of any foreign national to enter the United States - only citizens have that particular right. To challenge it (in a Canadian court) on the basis of discrimination would be in effect challenging the executive order of a foreign country - ultra vires, I believe the legal term is - it is beyond the legal authority of Canadian courts.
I'd imagine that the US would prefer pre-clearance remain in place for the duration of the ban - it is easier to refuse people and turn them back to Canada rather than leaving them in legal limbo in a US airport.
|
Trump's ban would be lifted in Canada the same way it was lifted last night in the USA. Under the Canada process, a lawyer or group of lawyers would challenge the ban on Canadian Constitutional grounds. On filing the Statement of claim, immediate injunctive relief is requested (temporary restraining order) prohibiting USCBP from enforcing the ban on Canadian soil until such time as the voire dire could be held in front of the judge with representative counsel from both sides.
The sticky situation for the Attorney General for Canada, they would be bound by the bilateral treaties to intervene in such a court case and defend the USA's interest. The biggest problem is finding a judge that would issue a TRO ahead of a voire dire. Assuming the plaintiff counsel could find such a judge that was also on docket duty, the plaintiff lawyers are also putting their careers at extreme risk. The plaintiff counsel have a extremely high duty to disclose all facts that may influence the judges decision. If new facts are discovered in the voire dire, the plaintiff counsel is subject to being disbarred.
Prev
Linear Mode
