Immigration is a bridge, not a wall

I am one of about a million Americans living in Canada. I hold both American and Canadian citizenship. I have lived in Canada since 1967.

My focus is on terrorism and immigration. The pictures are vivid and often frightening. Hundreds of thousands are fleeing war and persecution. They are victims, many times over, of war, the hazards of escape and the trauma of trying to establish a new life.

The government of Canada was aware of possible danger in accepting refugees. There might be terrorists included in this mass migration. There could be active or sleeper agents ready to strike solely for the purpose of sowing terror.

However, the nation acted quickly to meet a humanitarian crisis. Within a matter of months, it set a goal of taking in 25,000 refugees. The refugees were vetted. Medical examinations were carried out. Job skills were noted. Language capacity was determined. The applicants were matched with groups and individuals willing and able to help fund the needed assistance, together with government support and counselling, for resettlement purposes.

No small effort — but one that was, on the whole, successful. All of this is not to deny that problems might not exist, but isn’t the Canadian experience with refugees at least worth considering for the United States? Daniel J. Baum, Professor of Law, Osgoode Hall Law School (retired)