The INA`s ACA provision provides the power to pursue important political interests by entering into bilateral or multilateral agreements that allow for burden-sharing between the United States and other countries with respect to refugee protection claims. 3. None of these agreements has entered into force to date. But the INA will hamper judicial responses to these risks. As the INA explicitly notes that formal decisions taken under safe third country agreements are not subject to judicial review, all complaints challenging the new rule will face considerable obstacles. One possible argument is that before publishing the final provision, officials should have gone through the notification and commenting procedure generally prescribed by the Administrative Procedures Act. However, the administration may be responding that the new rule falls within the foreign affairs exception of the notification and commentation process, since the cooperation of other countries is an integral part of AKAR`s activities. Bilateral CAAs signed by the United States on the effective date of this rule include agreements with El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras and still have fewer complex waivers than the U.S.-Canada agreement, eliminating the need for a consultation period corresponding to the consultation period authorized by the U.S.-Canada agreement.  In addition, the extension of the procedures for screening for the thresholds underlying this rule, to allow foreigners to establish «more likely than not» prosecution or torture in the host country, offers additional procedures that go beyond what is available under the implementing rules of the U.S.-Canada agreement. Unlike many countries listed in Section 241(b) of the INA as potential countries of removal, the third country to which an alien would be expelled under a CBA is a country with which an alien does not necessarily have existing ties or an already existing reason to fear persecution or torture. Compare INA 208 (a) (2) (A), 8 U.S.C. 1158 (a) (2) (A), with INA 241 (b) (1) –2, 8 U.S.C 1231 (b) (1) -2). Moreover, unlike the countries to which aliens would normally be expelled in accordance with Section 241(b) of the INA, those third countries of removal undertook in advance, in accordance with binding agreements concluded with the United States, to give the alien access to a «full and fair trial» in order to obtain «asylum or an equivalent temporary start-up Printed Page 64002protection», INA 208 (a) (2) (A), 8 U.S.C.
. . .