This project addresses the policy issue of whether or not Canada and the United States should move towards the establishment of a North American perimeter approach to security. The issue has become of extreme importance and relevance following the attacks of September 11, 2001, on the United States. It continues to be discussed in great detail and has contributed to the Canada-US Smart Border Declaration, the 2011 Beyond the Border Action Plan, the recent 2012 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Northern Border Strategy and a number of other negotiations with continental implications. In this paper, previous literature is reviewed from scholars of two schools of thought who differ in their support for (Fortress North America) and against (Fortress America) the formation of a continental defensive perimeter. Through a critical examination of these authors' works, this project examines the strengths and weaknesses of each argument. This project also seeks to describe the current and anticipate the future course of action favoured by politicians and state officials in both Canada and the United States in regard to this highly contentious issue. A compromise between the two schools of thought is typically favoured by politicians and this paper will reveal the implications of this policy on the Canada-United States border. While a compromise is expected, this project advocates the establishment of a Canada-United States perimeter approach to security on account of its capability to reduce internal barriers to trade, enhance continental political partnership and better protect the citizens of North America. In order to achieve this transition three crucial steps must take place: a public demand for a perimeter approach to security; the ratification of legally binding agreements to reach this goal; and the establishment of a proven dispute settlement mechanism to address contentious issues between Canada and the United States. This project seeks to serve as a springboard on which to work towards this goal.