Score one against the "one security perimeter"

Federal court strikes down refugee agreement

"The United States is not a safe country for refugees, the Federal Court said Thursday as it ruled that Canada will no longer have the right to turn back asylum seekers at the border.
In the surprise judgment, the court found that Safe Third Country Agreement breaches the rights of asylum seekers under the United Nation Refugee Convention or the Convention Against Torture.
The three-year-old agreement denies refugees who have landed first in the U.S. the right to later seek protection in Canada, and vice versa. It has allowed Canada to automatically send refugee claimants at the border back to the United States. There, they are usually either detained or deported."

Put another way, whether or not you are considered a refugee should not be dependent upon your mode of transport.

"... The United States' policies and practices do not meet the conditions set down for authorizing Canada to enter into a STCA," Phelan wrote in his 126-page decision.
"The U.S. does not meet the Refugee Convention requirements nor the [UN] Convention Against Torture prohibition (the Maher Arar case being one example). Further, the STCA does not comply with the relevant provisions of the Charter."

Typical judges, eh? Upholding the Canadian Charter and UN conventions we are party to.

The STCA still holds till next January, by which time the Cons will have presumably launched an appeal.
So what's it gonna be based on? That the US is a democratic country? That's the Cons' rationale for allowing the US to execute Canadian prisoners.
Possibly. But I'm going with......"unelected activist judges"........because the US will feel more comfortable with that one.

Anyone with doubts at just how right the Federal Court is this time need look no further than the case of Benamar Benatta.