Access to Justice in Immigration and Refugee Law: A Comparative Review of Legal Frameworks, Institutional Barriers, and Reform Pathways in Canada and the United States-2026

Abstract

Access to justice is central to fair immigration and refugee systems, yet many migrants and refugees struggle to effectively use the legal protections that exist on paper. However, this review paper examines how access to justice operates in immigration and refugee law in Canada and the United States, with a focus on legal frameworks, institutional practices, and practical barriers faced by non-citizens. Drawing on academic literature, court decisions, policy reports, and institutional studies, this article reviews how both countries design and apply immigration and refugee procedures, and how these processes affect the ability of individuals to understand the law, obtain legal representation, and receive fair and timely decisions. The review shows that although Canada and the United States formally recognize principles such as due process and procedural fairness, access to justice remains uneven in practice. Some of the major challenges include limited access to publicly funded legal representation, complex and technical procedures, long delays and backlogs, immigration detention, and wide administrative discretion. Disproportionately, these barriers affect asylum seekers, refugees, and other vulnerable migrants. Therefore, through a comparative analysis, the paper highlights similarities and differences between the two systems and identifies lessons drawn from each. Furthermore, the paper concludes by reviewing reform pathways discussed in the literature, including expanding access to legal aid, simplifying procedures, strengthening oversight, and promoting community-based and rights-focused approaches. Therefore, improving access to justice in immigration and refugee law is presented not only as a legal requirement, but also as a necessary step toward fairness, accountability, and public confidence in migration governance.