Len Saunders, a Canadian now working as a Blaine immigration lawyer, deals exclusively with clients who have border immigration problems.
He said has been “swamped” with work since the 2001 terrorist attacks. “Since 9/11, there has been much more enforcement.”
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, however, doesn’t provide breakdowns of its national figures for Canada or B.C.
According to Homeland Security, which includes U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the U.S. welcomed 300 million people in 2009, the most recent statistics available.
Of those, 393,000 foreign nationals were removed from the U.S. that year — the seventh consecutive record high — with 72 per cent from Mexico.
Another 580,000 were allowed to return to their home countries without an expedited removal order, with 85 per cent of those being Mexican or Canadian.
There were 106,613 expedited removals from the U.S. in 2009, a figure that has been rising steadily from 69,923 in 2001.
Pauw, a Harvard Law School graduate and a nationally recognized expert on litigating immigration cases in Federal Court, believes the law is being wrongly applied to law-abiding Canadians who have proper travel documents (a Canadian passport) and are seeking only to enter the U.S. for pleasure.
“They are not coming with fraudulent travel documents or trying to sneak in,” he said. “It’s just insane how our border officers are treating Canadians. We see Canadians over and over again being grilled and intimidated.”
Pauw said he understands why Canadians subjected to such treatment start avoiding going to the U.S.
“It’s really terrible that our policies are causing people to have that attitude,” he said.The law makes it very difficult to appeal a border officer’s decision, Pauw added.
An appeal must be filed in U.S. federal district court challenging whether a person is a U.S. citizen or an alien, and whether an expedited removal order should have been issued.
Litigation can be expensive. One of Pauw’s Canadian clients, banned from entering the U.S. for five years, has spent $48,000 on a court challenge of a 2009 expedited removal order by a customs officer, which has the same effect as a court order by an immigration judge.
Pauw’s position in that case is that border officers are acting illegally, beyond the scope of what they are entitled to do. He learned Friday his client had lost the case.
“Basically, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency feels there is no law and they can do whatever they want,” Pauw said. “They can just look at a person and say, ‘I don’t like you, I don’t believe you’ and immediately act as the judge, jury and executioner, and banish a person from the United States for five years.”
A U.S. Court of Appeals case known as Khan vs. Holder put it this way last year: “The troubling reality of the expedited removal procedure is that a CBP officer can create the ... charge by deciding to convert the person’s status from a non-immigrant with valid papers to an intending immigrant without the proper papers, and then that same officer, free from the risk of judicial oversight, can confirm his or her suspicions of the person’s intentions and find the person guilty of that charge. |