I couldn’t find a thread that I thought would fit this story, so here it is, in a new thread.
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/non-binary-deportation-ruling-1.7588820
This is something I’ve been expecting these last six months or so - Canada becoming a refuge for displaced Americans who belong to groups being targeted by Trump and the MAGAs. Will this be a one-off fluke, or just the first of many?
Those Dopers who fear persecution in the US might want to take note of the precedent.
I think it could fit in the The Trump Administration: The Clusterfuck Continues thread.
So we don’t talk politics in the Politics and Elections forum, only in the Pit?
It sounds like a temporary thing while IRCC updates a report. A few months ago I read about another woman who made an asylum claim on the same basis. That seemed like the more interesting case because making a refugee claim while subject to a removal order is dodgy to me. Unfortunately, I can’t find the name or an update on it.
I imagine transgender people in the US feel the same way about their future as how I feel when Trump makes comments about making Canada the 51st state. It’s not a good feeling. I think it’s going to take more than restrictions on sports participation or certain medical treatments to support refugee status though.
I considered that, but this isn’t really a Trump clusterfuck, it’s an entirely Canadian response to part of the clusterfuck.
Section 7 of the Charter protects security of the person which can include personal medical issues (R v Morgentaler). I can see the argument that denial of medical treatment for political reasons could be the basis for a refugee claim. (Just spitballing; I don’t know if this type of claim has been advanced before.)
Yeah, I recall a recent case where the Ontario courts ruled against Ontario’s health insurance after OHIP denied funding for a particular type of transition surgery that was only done in Texas at the time with Section 7 being the crux of that matter.
I wonder how IRCC would deal with the whole red state vs blue state aspect of it. Presumably if people can live well enough in half the country, the claim is denied.
I don’t know about the details of refugee law, but I think it’s based on the country as a whole. I think (but could be wrong) that arguments based on “you’re safe in one part of the country so move there” aren’t very strong n refugee claims, because the country as a whole has a duty to protect its citizens. I could be mistaken, though.
I’d think it would have to be. The federal government sets the tone for the country, and we’ve seen lots of private individuals harassing people because of the tone the Trump administration has set. Not just transgender people, but migrants and minorities have come under attack quite a lot.
Sure, you might on average be better in one state vs another, but you never know when you might run into some Proud Boy type who will decide to attack you because that’s what Trump wants, regardless of the official policies of the particular state they’re in.
ETA: and then there are Federal policies that apply everywhere, such as restricting passports to only showing your gender at birth. No individual state can overcome that.
I started a tread asking if other countries would offer asylum for trans people, This might go in there.