Canadian refugee in ICE custody says he crossed border by mistake: Alberta applicant’s plea raises urgent cross-border questions

A Bangladeshi Canadian refugee in ICE custody is pleading for a path back to Canada after he says he accidentally crossed into the United States earlier this year. In interviews from detention in Buffalo within the past 24 hours, Mahin Shahriar described a disorienting sequence that began with a mental-health crisis near Montreal and ended with U.S. immigration detention, as Canadian authorities declined to readmit him.

Who is the “Canadian refugee in ICE custody,” and what happened?

Shahriar says he is a refugee applicant who had been living in Canada when, on May 12, he traveled with a friend offering a brief place to stay outside the city. He alleges the friend guided him to a location he didn’t realize was across the U.S. border, a crossing he now believes was tied to a human-trafficking attempt. Detained shortly after entry, he has remained in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody at the Buffalo facility while his fate is sorted out.

From detention, he has spoken about struggling with depression before the incident and insists there was no intention to leave Canada or to seek entry to the United States. The crux of his request is simple: to return to the Canadian refugee process he says he was already navigating.

Why Canada isn’t taking him back—at least for now

Officials have not provided a detailed, case-specific explanation, but the outlines are familiar to border lawyers: once a claimant departs Canada and is in U.S. custody, re-entry is not automatic. Case files hinge on where an asylum seeker is physically located and which jurisdiction is processing them. Without a formal readmission route approved by Canadian authorities, people can fall into a diplomatic and legal limbo—especially if the United States proceeds with removal steps while Canada maintains that the person left its territory.

Inside ICE detention: the immediate stakes

For Shahriar, each day in detention narrows options. If U.S. officials move his case toward removal, questions arise about destination: return to Bangladesh, transfer back to Canada, or continued custody if no receiving country is immediately available. His account adds a fresh human face to a policy bottleneck that typically plays out in court filings rather than public view.

Key details from the last 24 hours

• Identity & status: Refugee applicant from Bangladesh previously residing in Canada.

• Location: ICE detention in Buffalo, New York.

• Claim: Accidental border crossing amid a mental-health crisis; alleges a trafficking setup.

• Current posture: Canada has not agreed to take him back; U.S. custody continues.

What happens next for the detainee—and for others in similar situations

Shahriar’s lawyers, if retained, would likely pursue a multi-track strategy: establish credible-fear or other protection claims inside the U.S. system, petition for humanitarian release from detention, and seek diplomatic avenues for readmission to Canada based on his pending status and vulnerability. Each track carries its own evidentiary burden—medical records, communications with the friend involved, housing and service records from his time in Canada, and any documents confirming an active refugee file.

For similarly situated claimants, the case underscores three practical realities:

1. Physical presence drives procedure. Leaving Canada—even unintentionally—can reset which country controls your claim.

2. Documentation is everything. Emails, addresses, appointment letters, and medical notes can determine whether a readmission plea gets traction.

3. Speed matters. Early legal help raises the odds of parole from detention and preserves options before removal machinery hardens.

Mental health and trafficking red flags at the border

Shahriar’s account intersects with two risk vectors advocates flag repeatedly: mental-health vulnerability and exploitation by acquaintances posing as helpers. When someone is depressed, disoriented, or housing-insecure, a promised respite can mask predatory intent. The allegation that a “friend” guided him across an unmarked or lightly marked crossing fits patterns seen in smuggling/trafficking schemes that rely on confusion more than coercion.

Why this story is breaking through now

The timing is potent: a high-profile human narrative, fresh interviews from detention, and a cross-border standoff in which neither country has yet provided a clear, public path forward. For Canadians, it raises uncomfortable questions about duty of care to people already in the domestic refugee pipeline. For Americans, it spotlights the discretion ICE wields over detention and release while complex status questions are sorted.

What to watch in the coming days

• Legal filings: Look for motions seeking release on humanitarian grounds and any evidence packages supporting a trafficking narrative.

• Canadian posture: Whether officials confirm an exception or pilot a case-specific readmission route.

• U.S. next steps: Any movement toward removal or parole that signals how ICE is weighing vulnerability factors.

• Third-country risk: If neither Canada nor the U.S. resolves jurisdiction quickly, the risk of removal to Bangladesh grows.

The case of the Canadian refugee in ICE custody turns on a handful of urgent facts: a claimed accidental border crossing, alleged exploitation, worsening mental health, and two governments with overlapping but not identical responsibilities. Until a jurisdiction steps up with a concrete pathway, one man’s future remains suspended in a Buffalo detention center—an emblem of how quickly a paperwork edge case can become a human emergency.