Asylum seekers could challenge removal under safe third country agreements

People could present initial evidence in court against a decision to remove them under a safe third country agreement. These agreements concern sending people to another country treated as safe for seeking protection. Grounds include an agreement that does not cover the person or threats to their life or freedom based on race, religion, nationality, social group, or political opinion. Other grounds include no fair process for asylum or equivalent temporary protection, or technical problems that interfere with, prevent, or unduly delay removal.

Officials would have to release people from detention during court review. This covers people seeking court review of a decision to remove them under a safe third country agreement. Release would last for the duration of the court review.

The Secretary of State would set minimum standards for countries designated as safe destinations for asylum seekers. Before naming a country as safe, the Secretary would have to certify to Congress that it meets the standards. Standards would require fair legal procedures for immigrants, respect for law, and a low risk of imminent war or violent unrest. Countries would also need to follow international refugee and human rights agreements and independently have enough resources to treat asylum seekers humanely. The Secretary would have to issue the standards within 180 days after enactment.