Borderlines

A discussion of the 2021 immigration platforms of the Liberals, Conservatives, New Democrats, Greens, Bloc Quebecois and the People's Party of Canada. She can be found on Twitter @Twimmigration.Chantal Desloges is the Founder and Senior Partner of Desloges Law Group. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Cristina Guida is a senior associate lawyer with Green and Spiegel LLP in Toronto. She can be found on Twitter @crisguida_gands. We discuss authorization to work in Canada without a work permit, including business visitors, students, perfroming artists, maintained status, the global skills strategy and other categories. We also discuss what Canada's immigration department continues to be "work." Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Marina Sedai is an immigration lawyer and the past National Chair of the Canadian Bar Association Immigration Section, a role that she served in from 2018 – 2019, and is also a past provincial char of the CBABC Immigration Law Section. She can be found on Twitter @MarinaSedai. We discuss various myths about Canadian immigration law, including:* Refugees get more financial help than pensioners. & Foreign nationals immigrate and then bring their whole extended family over. *If including your spouse or common-law partner on your permanent resident application is inconvenient or unhelpful to your immigration process then you can exclude them and later sponsor them.* Volunteering isn't work.* If my kid is born in Canada then my H&C application is guaranteed to succeed. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We discuss how mandamus applications work. Adrienne Smith is a Partner at Battista Smith Migration Law Group.2:00Does filing mandamus applications annoy Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada? 5:30Has there been a change in the frequency with which mandamus applications are considered? 13:30During COVID-19 is there a difference in filing a mandamus application between online and paper applications? 18:00What is a mandamus application? 26:00What is the legal test for a mandamus application? 49:00During COVID-19 when a visa office is largely closed would you still file a mandamus demand letter?55:00Missed opportunities during COVID-19. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We discuss issues involving the deportation of long term permanent residents for criminality. 5:45 - What are the grounds for deporting a permanent resident for criminality? 13:00 - How does the appeal process work? 17:00 - What are the factors in deportation.19:00 - An overview of the history of the law involving the deportation of permanent residents. 26:00 - What is the probability of success for a permanent resident in avoiding deportation once proceedings start? 36:00 - Stays of removal41:00 - Strategies and tips for responding to procedural fairness letters involving removal. Michael Greene, Q.C. is an immigration lawyer in Calgary. He served as the National Chair of the Canadian Bar Association’s Citizenship & Immigration Section in 2000-2001. He is representing Jaskirat Singh Sidhu in his immigration and deportation matters. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hilary Evans Cameron is an Assistant Professor at Ryerson Law. Prior to become a faculty member, Hilary represented refugee claimants for a decade. She is the author of Refugee Law’s Fact-finding Crisis: Truth, Risk, and the Wrong Mistake. Her paper on risk salience in refugee decisions that we discuss can be found here. She is also the creator of www.meetgary.ca, a website which provides guidance to both decision makers and asylum claimants on the implicit biases and thought processes that can influence decision makers. She provides training to the Immigration and Refugee Board on this topic. 3:00The two strong pulls in the law of how a decision maker should make a decision in a refugee hearing that impacts risk salience. 7:00Can a decision maker ever be truly neutral? 11:00Does the fact that the refugee process starts with a removal order “set things up” for strict scrutiny? Plus how politicians can influence error preference. 18:30Refugee acceptance rates have increased recently. Is this a result of new

Dennis McCrea was the founder of McCrea Immigration Law. He started practicing immigration law in 1974, and was one of the original members of Vancouver's immigration bar. In this episode we discuss how to build an immigration practice, how the practice of immigration law has evolved, avoiding burnout and more.3:00How lawyers use to interact with visa officers. 6:00The formation of the immigration bar. 11:30Thoughts on whether it is possible to have both a corporate immigration practice and a refugee or enforcement practice.15:30Did the practice of immigration law become more or less fun over time? 18:00What kept Dennis motivated when it came to practicing immigration law? 22:30What type of cases did Dennis enjoy the most? 26:00What are some tools that lawyers can use to prevent burnout? 41:00Did the practice of immigration law vary depending on which political party were in power?42:00How to retire. 45:00How can junior lawyers who are trying to build a practice have time for hobbies? 48:00How Steven and Dea

Joshua Sohn practiced immigration law for over 25 years. He is a past president of the Canadian Bar Association’s Immigration section. He worked both as a sole practicioner, at a small firm and at a big 4 accounting firm. We discuss Joshua’s career, what made him go to law school, whether he took immigration courses in law school, how he started in refugee law, differences between working as a solo practicioner, small firm and eventually at a big 4 accounting firm, and then back to a small firm, differences working in a downtown core vs suburb, and managing the stress of practicing immigration law and running a business. There are a lot of nuggets in here for aspiring lawyers and current practicioners.2:00Quitting social media after retirement. 9:00Law school14:00Articles17:30Are there any courses or law schools that are best to help someone start a career in immigration? 19:30Starting a career in refugee law. 22:30Is it possible to make a viable practice just doing refugee law? 29:00The law firm as training

A discussion of the philosophy behind economic immigration, how Canada ranks economic immigrants, Ministerial Instructions and listener Q&A. Ashal Kaushal is an Assistant Professor at the University of British Columbia's Allard School of Law, where she teaches, amongst other courses, Immigration Law.6:00An introduction to Canada’s points system, how Express Entry changed it and Ministerial Instructions. 14:30The three models of economic immigration. The Human Capital Model, the Demand-Driven Model and the Neo-Corporatist Model22:00How the same job offer can be worth different points depending on the immigration program.28:30Is it possible to qualify the value of a prospective economic immigrant through their job? 32:00Why are the points what they are? Why would a job offer go from 600 to 200 / 50, for example? How did the change from Conservative to Liberal government change? 37:30A ranking system based on wage. 44:00Ministerial InstructionsListener Questions55:30How long will Express Entry last before th

A discussion of when someone can be inadmissible to Canada for having committed a crime which doesn’t lead to a conviction. Cases referenced are Garcia v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2021 FC 141 and Dlieow v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 59Sania (Ahmed) Chaudhry was counsel in Garcia. She is currently Legal Counsel (Professional Conduct Proceedings) at Real Estate Council of Alberta.2:00Introduction and an overview of Garcia v. Canada. 15:00The purpose of Canada’s inadmissibility provisions. 17:10What is the standard of proof for determining that someone committed a crime where there is no conviciton? 19:45A review of Enforcement Manual 230:30Determining equivalency and issues with inadmissibility findings where there is no conviction. 39:30Dlieow v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)46:00 Living in a society where the State makes everything a crime. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A discussion of s. 34(1)(f) of Canada's Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which provides that a foreign national or permanent resident is inadmissible for being the member of an organization that has committed terrorism. Topics include how terrorism, organization and membership are defined, the Proud Boys, QAnon and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party. 5:45What is terrorism under Canadian immigration legislation? 9:45What is an organization? 15:30What does it mean to be a “member?” 19:00The Bangladesh Nationalist Party29:00Would Nelson Mandela be encompassed? 30:45Should only organizations that are officially designated by the government render someone inadmissible?39:39The Ministerial relief process. 47:35Jose Figuerora 53:45Could someone being a QAnon adherent make them inadmissible to Canada? 1:00Does the designation of the Proud Boys broaden what could result in inadmissibility due to terrorism? 1:03Could the leader of a party calling for an insurrection lead to all members of that organization being

Chieu v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2002 SCC 3 was a landmark Supreme Court of Canada which affirmed the use of the Ribic factors in the H&C assessment. We discuss these factors and how they are used in immigration appeals.1:00How the assessment of Humanitarian & Compassionate considerations has become somewhat nebulus. 4:00A case study of Chieu v. Canada 10:00What is an example of a negative country condition in someone’s country of citizenship? 13:00The decision and principles in Chieu. 15:00The Federal Court of Canada in Zhang v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 927, which seems to limit Chieu. 16:00The Ribic factors and the types of immigration appeals. 20:00How much weight each factor should get. 25:00Stories about our appeals. 32:00The remorse factor and flexibility. 45:00The counter arguments to considering country of citizenship conditions. 50:00 Consents on appeal. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A discussion about responding to procedural fairness letters with digressions on possible bias against people from Punjab, unreasonable documentation requests, tunnel vision amongst visa officers, how if an officer goes out looking for misrepresentation in an application they will probably find it, aggressively banning people from Canada as a deterrance policy, IRCC misleading Parliament about whether it bounces applications for incompleteness and more.Raj Sharma is a Partner at Stewart Sharma Harsanyi in Calgary. He can be found on Twitter @immlawyercanada2:30 When does IRCC have to send a procedural fairness letter vs. being able to refuse an application without one?15:00Specific issues with the Canadian visa offices in New Delhi and Chandigarh. 21:00Racialized assessments of visa applications. 23:00Why hunting for misrep can lead to misrep findings. 25:00Misrepresentation as a deterrence policy. 35:00Is there a specific focus on Punjabs? 44:00Can you tell if someone is lying as soon as you meet them at th

This episode is about the concept of a universal basic income and how it would work in Canada. We are joined by Sheila Regehr and Sameer Nurmohamed of Basic Income Canada Network. We discuss which type of immigrants (permanent residents, workers, students, asylum claimants, people without status) etc. would be eligible, whether a basic income would impact other public funding for services like legal aid, whether it would cause inflation, and more.5:30 What are different models of universal basic income? 9:00How is the amount of basic income calculated? 10:45What was the Ontario pilot project?12:45In practice is there a difference between an income guarantee model and a flat-payment model?14:30Do wealthy people get the same payment and benefit under a universal basic income? 15:30How would a universal basic income be funded? 23:45Would a universal basic income replace other services like legal aid? 28:25A review of Motion 46 - GUARANTEED LIVABLE BASIC INCOME30:35Would international students, foreign workers

Sergio Marchi was Canada’s Minister of Citizenship and Immigration from 1993-1995. 3:00 – Does someone keep the Minister title their whole life? 4:50 – What was the political consensus regarding Canadian immigration at the end of the 1980s? How did the Reform Party impact things? 8:00 – The mix of immigrants between economic, family and humanitarian immigrants. 11:15 – What dictates whether IRCC meets its level targets? 14:30 – The Brian Mulroney government was considering moving immigration under Public Safety. Under Sergio Marchi it instead became it’s on Ministry. What prompted this? 17:30 – Canadian attitudes to refugee resettlements and misconceptions. 20:45 – Sources of resistance to refugee resettlement. Resettled refugees vs asylum seekers. 23:00 – Changes that Minister Marchi made to the refugee determination process. 25:00 – What was Minister Marchi’s approach to intervening on specific cases? When would Minister Marchi help Members of Parliament on constituent files? Did it matter which political

Syed Farhan Ali shares his Canadian immigration story. During the time that his spousal sponsorship application was in process he was denied temporary entry to Canada, missed the birth of his first child and missed her first steps. He recently arrived in Canada after a three year application process. Chantal Dube is a Spokesperson for Spousal Sponsorship Advocates, a group with more than 5,000 members in Canada that argues for reforms to the family reunification process.3:15Said tells the story of his spousal sponsorship application. His application took 34 months to process. During the processing of his application Canada denied his visitor visa applications. He missed the birth of his children and their first steps, although he was able to reunite with his wife during brief trips to the United States, which did grant him a visitor visa. 21:00We discuss the refusal of temporary resident visas for people with spousal sponsorship applications in process, people with frequent travel histories, people with A

The Honourable Chris Alexander served as Canada's Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada from July 2013 to November 2015. He represented the riding of Ajax—Pickering in the House of Commons of Canada from 2011 to 2015. Prior to that spent 18 years in the Canadian Foreign Service, serving as Canada's first resident Ambassador to Afghnistan from 2003 - 2005. Subsequent to being an Member of Parliament he ran for the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada.As Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Mr. Alexander presided over the launch of Express Entry, the termination of the Immigrant Investor Program and the introduction of the Barbaric Cultural Practices Act, which prohibited forced and underaged marriages.5:09 – If there was one misconception about Canadian immigration law that Minister Alexander would like to change what would it be? 15:00 – Bill C-24 and the revocation of citizenship for dual nationals convicted of high crimes. 16:00 – Whether there was a strong anti-fraud and ant

The Honourable John McCallum served as Canada's Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada from November 2015 to January 2017. A Member of Parliament from 2000 - 2017, he also served as Defence Minister under Jean Chrétien, and Veterans Affairs Minister, National Revenue Minister, Natural Resources Minister and as Chair of the Expenditure Review Committee under Paul Martin. As Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship in Justin Trudeau’s cabinet, Mr. McCallum led Canada's effort to welcome 25,000 Syrian refugees over a period of three months. He also increased the age of dependency from 18-22, repealed conditional permanent residency and reduced family class processing times.5:00 – The resettlement of 40,000 refugees in Canada.22:00 – The division of immigration repsonsibilities between IRCC, CBSA and ESDC. Should they be combined?28:00 – What goes into reducing processing times.33:00 – Abolishing conditional permanent residence.39:00 – Mr. McCallum’s approach to being immigration c

Section 15 of Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides that every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination. Aidan Campbell joins to discuss the application of s. 15 of the Charter to Canadian immigration law and the implications recent Supreme Court of Canada decision in Fraser v. Canada. Aidan Campbell is an Associate at Mahon & Company, a progressive firm which practices in Criminal Law, Immigration and Refugee Law, Public Interest & Constitutional Litigation, Sex Worker Rights, Prisoners’ Rights, Professional Discipline. Extradition Law and Tenants' Rights Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In R v. Kattenburg Justice Stratas of the Federal Court of Appeal cautioned judges against giving "virtue signalling and populism a go." This prompted a largely philosophical discussion about the role of judges, a Toronto judge who wore a Make America Great Again hat in court, a Quebec judge who proclaimed herself a feminist before making statements about Quebec's ban on religious attire, Ruth Bader Ginsburg criticizing President Trump, and defining what virtue signaling even is. Andrew Hayes is a US immigration lawyer who practices out of Vancouver. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.