The Right to Family Life and Immigration Enforcement: How States Legally Justify Family Separation In: Canada · United States · United Kingdom · Australia ECHR · ICCPR · UNCRC, 2026

Immigration enforcement decisions do not affect individuals alone. Every deportation, detention, or refusal of status also affects spouses, children, and extended family members who depend on the person being removed. When a state enforces immigration law, it at the same time makes a decision about whether a family will remain together or be separated. It is on this note that the present review paper examines the legal tension between the state’s authority to control immigration and the internationally protected right to family life. That right is recognised under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), Articles 17 and 23 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and Article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). Using a comparative approach, the paper analyses how four major common-law jurisdictions: Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia address family separation in immigration enforcement. The analysis draws on legislation, leading case law, tribunal practice, and recent enforcement data. It shows that while all four states formally acknowledge the importance of family life, each system contains structural weaknesses that allow family separation to occur extensively. The paper argues that family separation is not just a policy side-effect of immigration enforcement but a legal consequence that must be justified under international human rights law. It concludes that existing frameworks often fall short of their stated commitments, especially where children are involved.

Family separation; immigration enforcement; right to family life; Article 8 ECHR; ICCPR Articles 17 and 23; best interests of the child; UNCRC Article 3; proportionality; humanitarian discretion.

1. American Civil Liberties Union. (2024). Family separation: A timeline. https://www.aclu.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. American Immigration Council. (2024). Family separation and immigration enforcement. https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. American Immigration Council. (2024). The impact of deportation on American families. https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Australian Human Rights Commission. (2014). The forgotten children: National inquiry into children in immigration detention. https://humanrights.gov.au [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Australian Law Reform Commission. (2021). Judicial review of administrative action (ALRC Report No. 142). https://www.alrc.gov.au [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 817. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Brabeck, K., Lykes, M. B., and Hunter, C. (2014). The psychosocial impact of detention and deportation on U.S. migrant children and families. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 84(5), 496–505. https://doi.org/10.1037/ort0000011 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Canadian Council for Refugees. (2023). H&C applications and family separation in Canada. https://ccrweb.ca [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Committee on the Rights of the Child. (2013). General comment No. 14: The right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration (Art. 3, para. 1) (CRC/C/GC/14). United Nations. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Council of Europe. (2022). Guide on Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights: Right to respect for private and family life. https://www.echr.coe.int [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. European Convention on Human Rights, Nov. 4, 1950, 213 U.N.T.S. 221. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. García Hernández, C. C. (2019). Migrating to prison: America’s obsession with locking up immigrants. The New Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Home Office. (2024). Family life (as a partner or parent), private life and exceptional circumstances. UK Government. https://www.gov.uk [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. House of Commons Library. (2025). Immigration and the European Convention on Human Rights (CBP-10376). UK Parliament. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Immigration and Refugees Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (Canada). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. (2025). Humanitarian and compassionate considerations: Program delivery instructions. Government of Canada. https://www.canada.ca [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Dec. 16, 1966, 999 U.N.T.S. 171. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Kanthasamy v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2015 SCC 61. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Kerry v. Din, 576 U.S. 86 (2015). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Kleindienst v. Mandel, 408 U.S. 753 (1972). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (Australia). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Motomura, H. (2014). Immigration outside the law. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (UK), as amended. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Plaintiff S10/2011 v. Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2012] HCA 31. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Razgar v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, [2004] UKHL 27. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Rehaag, S. (2012). Judicial review of refugee determinations: The luck of the draw? Queen’s Law Journal, 38(1), 1–58. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. UCLA School of Law, Center for Immigration Law and Policy. (2024). Cruel indifference: Family separation at the U.S.–Mexico border. https://law.ucla.edu [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Nov. 20, 1989, 1577 U.N.T.S. 3. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A. Res. 217A (III), U.N. Doc. A/810 (1948). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. ZH (Tanzania) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, [2011] UKSC 4. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]