Bill C-12 Sparks Alarm: Critics Warn Canada Is Moving Toward US-Style Border Controls

Canada’s Liberal government has fast-tracked Bill C-12, formally the Strengthening Canada’s Immigration System and Borders Act, a package of measures critics say will tighten border controls, restrict refugee protections and expand executive authority over immigration processes.

What the Bill Would Change

Bill C-12 passed third reading in the House of Commons on 11 December and is scheduled for Senate consideration in February. If approved, several notable changes would take effect:

• Delayed Asylum Claims: Asylum claims filed more than one year after arrival in Canada would be removed from consideration by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada and instead be handled by an immigration officer through a pre-removal risk assessment (PRRA).
• Land-Border Time Limit: Claims made at the Canada–US land border more than 14 days after arrival would not be referred to the Board under the bill.
• Expanded Executive Powers: The law would broaden information-sharing across government agencies and give officials greater authority to modify, cancel or control immigration documents and processes.

Why Experts Are Concerned

Legal scholars, refugee advocates and a coalition of practitioners have warned the changes could substantially weaken refugee protections. Idil Atak, a professor of refugee and human rights law at Toronto Metropolitan University, called the bill "very regressive in terms of refugee protection," saying it represents an unprecedented expansion of executive power.

"Bill C-12 borrows ideas from the United States about how to make it more difficult," said Audrey Macklin, an immigration and refugee law professor at the University of Toronto.

Forty lawyers and legal practitioners argued in a Toronto Star op-ed that PRRAs—single-officer assessments—have high rejection rates and do not provide the same procedural safeguards as hearings before the independent Immigration and Refugee Board. Critics say the PRRA pathway risks fast-tracking removals without a full, fair hearing.

Observers also warned the bill echoes past exclusionary immigration policies in Canada’s history, which targeted groups including South Asians, Chinese and Japanese immigrants at the turn of the 20th century.

Human Impact

Experts point out many legitimate reasons why someone might delay claiming asylum—fear for personal safety, lack of legal information, trauma, or the circumstances of international students who may become vulnerable after recent restrictions on student admissions introduced since 2024. Macklin noted that someone who came to Canada as a student and later felt unable to return home because of persecution could be unfairly disadvantaged under the new rules.

Syed Hussan, executive director of the Migrant Workers Alliance for Change, said political rhetoric from both major parties that blames migrants for economic problems has helped produce this legislation. He and other critics argue the measures risk increasing xenophobia and scapegoating of immigrants.

International and Political Context

Critics contend part of the motivation may be political: aligning Canada’s border measures more closely with the United States could be seen as a way to smooth relations while trade negotiations continue. However, many argue the U.S. is not a reliably "safe third country" for asylum seekers—pointing to aggressive immigration enforcement and recent ICE raids that have accelerated deportations—so relying on U.S.-style practices raises concerns about protection and due process.

Supporters of the bill argue it seeks to strengthen borders and immigration management. Opponents say it will damage Canada’s international obligations and reputation as a welcoming country. "We do have an obligation, a moral obligation, to protect refugees," Atak said.

As the Senate prepares to review the legislation, refugee advocates, lawyers and academics are mobilizing to highlight potential legal and human-rights consequences if these measures become law.