"In June 2007, the Fraser Institute held a conference in Toronto, Ontario, titled, "Immigration Policy, Border Controls, and the Terrorist Threat In Canada and the United States."The chapters in this volume, which arose from this conference, raise fundamental questions about weaknesses in Canada's current immigration policies and procedures." "The contributors to this volume identify serious threats and weaknesses in the immigration, asylum, and border regimes from both Canadian and American perspectives. The authors are not opposed to effectively managed immigration or allowing genuine refugees who pose no security threat to enter the country through a well-vetted system. All believe that the vast majority of immigrants pose no danger, but are simply seeking to improve their freedom and prosperity. Nevertheless given the stakes raised by terrorist attacks, the entry of even a small number of potentially dangerous individuals should warrant major attention and policy review."--BOOK JACKET.

This book examines a broad range of issues in order to better understand if, how, and why immigration policies and practices have changed in the US, Western Europe, and Commonwealth countries in response to the threat of terrorism.

The events of 9/11 turned North American politics upside down. US policy makers focused less on how they could better integrate the economies of Mexico, Canada, and the United States and more on security and sovereignty. Security experts tend to view the events that followed within a bilateral framework. Game Changer broadens the canvas examining how America’s desire to keep its two borders closed to threats but open to trade has influenced Canada and Mexico. The contributors draw on international relations theory to examine and explain not only how post-911 security policy has transformed relations between the three countries but also how policy makers can reconcile the need for greater regional cooperation in the security realm with national autonomy in other areas of life. By adopting a truly North American, or trilateral, framework, this challenging and authoritative volume suggests new approaches to security in the post-9/11 world.

Since the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, U.S. immigration and refugee policy has developed based on narrow and evolving theories of `national security`. Immigration reform legislation, federal regulations, and administrative policy changes have been justified in terms of the nation`s safety. On 1 March 2003, the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) was folded into the massive new U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), formally making immigration a homeland defense concern. Counterterror and immigration experts increasingly agree on what constitute effective and appropriate immigration policy reforms in light of the terrorist threat. Unfortunately, many of the post-September 11 policy changes do little to advance public safety and violate the rights of refugees and asylum seekers. These include reductions in refugee admissions, the criminal prosecution of asylum seekers, the blanket detention of Haitians, and a safe third-country asylum agreement between the United States and Canada. Other measures offend basic rights and may undermine counterterror efforts. These include `preventive` arrests, closed deportation proceedings, and `call-in` registration programs. This article reviews post-September 11 U.S. policy developments based on their impact on migrant rights and their efficacy as counterterror measures. It argues for a more nuanced and rigorous sense of `national security` in crafting refugee and immigration policy.

Papers from a conference, The Security of Freedom, held at the Faculty of Law, University of Toronto on Nov. 9-10, 2001.

"Over the past few years border security has been debated extensively by politicians and pundits alike, but the majority of this debate has centered on security challenges along the Southern border with Mexico. Some of these concerns are warranted when considering the level of violence that is being seen in Mexico, but much of that violence is in relation to criminal elements, and not terrorist organizations who seek to destroy America. In the post 9/11 world America's greatest domestic threat to national security does not lay in the US border with Mexico, but instead its Northern border with Canada. This threat does not come from every day Canadians, but from terrorist organizations who have used Canada's progressive immigration policies to infiltrate North American soil. Their presence in Canada constitutes a serious threat US national security that must be dealt with appropriately. Both the United States and Canada have sought to improve security along the border in recent years through increases in resources and cooperation, but these efforts have done very little to mitigate the threat. Terrorist organizations, like Al Qaeda, have already expressed their desire to acquire weapons of mass destruction, and if they are successful they will likely be used against the West at some point in the future. For this very reason the United States must begin to take a more proactive stance to limit those security shortfalls that currently threaten national security. America's failure to act today could result in unimaginable consequences for tomorrow."--Abstract.