By Sarah Mehta
As part of our multiple tactics to keep up the pressure against President Trump’s Muslim immigration ban, on Friday the ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request with U.S. Customs and Border Protection demanding records on the implementation of the executive order at all 15 CBP “preclearance” airport locations abroad. These are facilities at airports in other countries where people coming to the U.S. go through U.S. immigration and customs before being allowed to get on their flights.
The preclearance program operates in Canada, Ireland, Aruba, the Bahamas, Bermuda, and the United Arab Emirates (although CBP plans to expand to other countries). The potential impact of the policies at these locations is significant, as some 16 million people heading to the U.S. went through preclearance in 2015.
Our FOIA request also asks for documents relating to compliance with court rulings stopping the order from being carried out. Before those court decisions, news reports documented several instances already of people traveling to the U.S. being prevented entry to the United States and having their visas revoked because they were citizens of one of the seven banned majority-Muslim countries. A Syrian doctor, for example, was refused admission at preclearance in the Abu Dhabi airport, where his valid visa was also cancelled. The stories also report on one person who was turned away in Ireland and five Canadians of Moroccan origin denied entry.
Both Ireland and Canada have expressed serious concerns over the executive order and its implementation at airports on their soil. The Irish prime minister ordered a complete review of the preclearance program in Ireland, and Irish and U.S. officials are meeting to discuss the executive order this month.
Canada, which hosts 9 of the 15 preclearance locations at airports, has ordered an investigation as to whether the implementation of the executive order violates Canadian law. A spokesperson for the Canadian government warned, “Any U.S. pre-clearance activities in Canada have to be carried out in a manner consistent with Canadian law, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian Bill of Rights and the Canadian Human Rights Act.”
Today, President Trump is meeting for the first time with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. They are likely to discuss the executive order, which not only affects Canada as a major host for the preclearance program, but also Canadian citizens, many of whom frequently travel to the U.S. — and many of whom are Muslim.
Some Canadian Muslims have already been subject to intense questioning at the border about their religious observance and opinions on Trump since the executive order went into effect. Even if the president issues a narrower version of the travel and refugee ban, this improper treatment of Muslim travelers by CBP officers could continue.
The Canadian Civil Liberties Association voiced support for our FOIA request, calling it “an important accountability measure and check on government powers.” Sukanya Pillay, the CCLA’s executive director and general counsel, added, “Transparency and a clear understanding of rules is a bulwark against unlawful discrimination and overreach.”
Canada is right to make sure the Muslim ban does not violate domestic and international law banning religious profiling and discrimination. Attention and pressure from the countries who host preclearance facilities may play an important role in reminding Trump of the growing costs of his executive order.
Sarah Mehta is a Researcher with the ACLU Human Rights Program
It makes me sad that Canada is now clearly taking the leadership in one of the areas in which I truly used to believe that the United States was exceptional, acceptance of refugees. That belief was shaken by the limiting of entry of Jews ( WWII), near the end of the Viet Nam war and again now from Muslim countries. It is time for us to stop pretending that we are either great or brave if we will not live up to our own values and choose to cower behind our borders while others suffer.
We don’t want to end up like Europe with all of the problems they’re now experiencing from out of control immigration.
Europe is certainly a model I wouldn’t want to replicate in terms of segregating immigrant populations.
“We don’t want to end up like Europe with all of the problems they’re now experiencing from out of control immigration.”
I also do not want to end up like Europe of the 1930’s and 1940’s which I see as a more likely risk under the current administration.
Can this be considered our Godwin’s Law moment of the day?
You really need to reel in the hysteria.
Keith
“You really need to reel in the hysteria.”
This has nothing to do with either Godwin’s law nor hysteria. It was you who introduced the comparison with Europe. I only pointed to the dangers of using Europe as a model for situations that might or might not apply to the United States using a different time frame as my referent.
As humans, we are absolutely terrible at relative risk assessment. I see this daily in my practice when women as young as in their 20’s come in terrified by the possibility of breast cancer, but do not seem concerned about the fact that they are morbidly obese and smoke. Many more women die of cardiovascular disease than do of breast cancer. We saw the same distorted thinking during the Ebola epidemic. The United States spent many millions of dollars on Ebola screening for a disease that was epidemic….in West Africa only. That was millions of dollars that could have been used to prevent or treat diseases that are endemic in this country.
And now, we are making the same error again. We are targeting countries from which there has been no loss of life in the past 15 years in the US due to refugee terrorists instead of strengthening diplomatic ties and ratcheting down the anti religious propaganda, steps that might actually make us stronger and safer.