Trump Administration Releases New Plans to Enforce Birthright Citizenship Order

Good overview:

Current Birthright Citizenship Rules vs. Proposed Changes

While the executive order is not yet in effect, recent documents from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the State Department, and the Social Security Administration (SSA) outline the administration’s intended approach. The proposed strategy involves implementing stricter requirements for parents to obtain U.S. passportsSocial Security numbers (SSNs), and federal benefits for their U.S.-born children.

How It Currently Works

  • A child’s U.S. birth certificate is considered sufficient proof of U.S. citizenship, and parents can present it to the government to get a passport, SSN, and federal benefits for their child.
  • Parents don’t need to prove their own citizenship or immigration status when applying for these documents or benefits on their U.S.-born child’s behalf (except in cases involving foreign diplomats, who aren’t considered under U.S. jurisdiction).

How It Would Work Under the Proposed Plan

  • For any child born in the U.S. after the executive order’s effective date, their U.S. birth certificate alone is not considered sufficient proof of U.S. citizenship, and parents will need to provide additional documentation to obtain a passport, SSN, or federal benefits for their child.
  • At least one parent would need to prove their own citizenship or eligible immigration status when applying for these documents or benefits on their U.S.-born child’s behalf.
  • Federal agencies would verify parental status during or after birth registration.
  • Federal documents recognizing U.S. citizenship are not issued to children whose parents lack qualifying status.

“Ending birthright citizenship by fiat in contravention of several existing court challenges is an effort destined for failure. In the meantime, it will only create chaos and confusion in many households already struggling to navigate our broken immigration system.” — Erik Finch | Director of Global Operations, Boundless Immigration | Former USCIS Officer

Implications for Individuals and Families

Restricted birthright citizenship would have profound consequences on individuals and families:

  • Family Planning and Uncertainty: Legal ambiguities would likely deter many immigrant and mixed-status families from having children in the U.S., leading some to delay or reconsider building their families there.
  • Risk of Statelessness: Children denied citizenship at birth — especially if their parents’ home countries cannot confer nationality — could become stateless, facing lifelong barriers to educationhealthcaretravel, and legal protection.
  • Reduced Access to Services: Even the threat of this policy’s implementation is likely to discourage families from seeking healthcare or essential public services, worsening health and welfare outcomes.
  • Bureaucratic and Legal Challenges: Stricter documentation rules could cause errors, delays, or denials, increasing stress and potential legal limbo for families.

Implications for Employers

Employers that depend on global talent could face serious challenges:

  • Recruitment and Retention: Uncertainty around children’s citizenship may deter skilled foreign professionals from working in or staying in the U.S.
  • HR Complexity and Compliance: Varied state laws could complicate HR, payroll, and benefits administration, requiring greater investment in immigration support for employees and their families.
  • Risk of Discrimination: Increased scrutiny of family and citizenship status raises the risk of accidental anti-discrimination violations and workplace unfairness.
  • Employee Wellbeing and Productivity: Ongoing anxiety about family status can lower morale, productivity, and long-term workforce stability, ultimately impacting company competitiveness.

Broader Social and Economic Implications

Fewer foreign-born residents and their U.S.-citizen children would reduce population diversity, shrink the workforce, and limit innovation. Communities of color — especially Latino families — would be disproportionately affected, deepening existing inequalities and creating long-term disparities. Over time, this could lead to a rise in U.S.-born individuals without legal status or statehood, increasing poverty, exclusion, and instability.

In addition, the proposed policy could expand the undocumented immigrant population, strain the U.S. immigration system, and fuel long-term political tension. Denying birthright citizenship risks alienating immigrant communities, weakening social cohesion, and creating a stateless underclass with limited access to education, jobs, and stability.

Even as a proposal, the policy has already sparked confusion and anxiety, leading some families to avoid essential services and underscoring the urgent need for clear guidance and community support.

Multiple court rulings have blocked the executive order, and it’s unclear if or when the administration’s plans will take effect. However, the government’s ongoing preparations suggests the issue will remain a priority for the Trump administration.


The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and state attorneys general have called the order unconstitutional and vowed to continue fighting it in court. Immigration advocates have reassured families that, for now, children born in the U.S. remain U.S. citizens regardless of their parents’ status, and no immediate action is required.

Source: Trump Administration Releases New Plans to Enforce Birthright Citizenship Order

Éditorial | Qui doit fixer les limites de la liberté d’expression?

Sensible approach rather than simply cancelling:

…Il n’y a pas de place pour le discours haineux dans le début public. Quiconque incite à la haine contre un groupe identifiable est passible d’accusations criminelles. Il existe une exception — et non la moindre — protégeant de poursuites une personne qui a exprimé de bonne foi une opinion sur un sujet religieux ou en se fondant sur un texte religieux auquel il croit. Cette exemption a suscité de vives critiques du chef du Bloc québécois, Yves-François Blanchet, qui n’a pas été en mesure de convaincre Ottawa d’agir pour refermer cette « brèche complaisante ».

Le cadre juridique canadien résiste à la tentation de faire une hiérarchie des droits constitutionnels ; ils sont plutôt en concurrence permanente les uns par rapport aux autres. En matière de liberté d’expression, les tribunaux ont reconnu à maintes reprises que ce droit englobait les idées impopulaires ou offensantes, et les propos qui choquent ou qui dérangent. La barre est très haute pour entrer dans la catégorie du discours haineux.

Peut-être que Sean Feucht a dépassé les limites. Si c’est le cas, il faudra agir aussi contre les rappeurs et les influenceurs masculinistes qui véhiculent les pires clichés misogynes. Il faudra sans doute inspecter les églises, les mosquées et les synagogues pour y débusquer les prêcheurs outranciers qui pourraient cracher contre le vent de la modernité. Il nous faudra une police de la pensée, bien rodée et bien financée, car l’ouvrage ne manquera pas.

Il y avait une autre façon de gérer le dossier de Sean Feucht, en utilisant les outils en place : porter plainte à la police, faire une enquête en bonne et due forme, s’en remettre à la norme du contrôle judiciaire pour séparer ce qui relève de la liberté d’expression et du discours haineux. En se faisant à la fois juges et parties de la situation, les autorités municipales et policières ont foulé ces principes d’une façon dérangeante, qui a plus à voir avec la culture de l’annulation qu’avec la protection des libertés civiles.

Source: Éditorial | Qui doit fixer les limites de la liberté d’expression?

… There is no place for hate speech in the public opening. Anyone who incites hatred against an identifiable group is liable to criminal charges. There is an exception – and not the least – protecting from prosecution a person who has expressed a good faith opinion on a religious subject or based on a religious text in which he believes. This exemption was strongly criticized by the leader of the Bloc Québécois, Yves-François Blanchet, who was unable to convince Ottawa to take action to close this “complacent breach”.

The Canadian legal framework resists the temptation to make a hierarchy of constitutional rights; rather, they are in permanent competition with each other. In terms of freedom of expression, the courts have repeatedly recognized that this right encompasses unpopular or offensive ideas, and remarks that shock or disturb. The bar is very high to enter the category of hate speech.

Maybe Sean Feucht has crossed the line. If this is the case, it will also be necessary to act against rappers and masculinist influencers who convey the worst misogynistic clichés. It will probably be necessary to inspect churches, mosques and synagogues to flush out the outrageous preachers who could spit against the wind of modernity. We will need a police of thought, well-honed and well-funded, because the work will not be lacking.

There was another way to manage Sean Feucht’s case, using the tools in place: file a complaint with the police, make a proper investigation, rely on the norm of judicial control to separate what is freedom of expression and hate speech. By making themselves both judges and parties to the situation, the municipal and police authorities have trampled on these principles in a disturbing way, which has more to do with the culture of annulment than with the protection of civil liberties.

Canadian immigration refusal letters will now come with officers’ notes

Overdue and hopefully will reduce need for time consuming ATIP requests. But to be seen in terms of how informative these notes will be and the degree they satisfy applicants (IRCC also has the largest number of court proceedings):

The Immigration Department has started to include officers’ notes in refusal letters to failed immigration applicants, who have long complained of insufficient information about the reasons they’re refused.

The change is a response to the soaring immigration applications and refusals, which have led to a significant growth in the number of access-to-information requests over the years, clogging up the Access to Information and Privacy system, as it was the only way applicants and counsel could obtain their case notes. 

“As part of our ongoing efforts to improve our services, on July 29, 2025, we started proactively providing officer decision notes along with refusal letters for certain applications,” the department says on its website.

“These notes come from the officer who made the final decision on the application. This change makes it easier for clients to get their personal information on their application. This supports our commitment to delivering our services with greater transparency.”

The change will cover applications for extensions for temporary resident visas (excluding electronic travel authorizations and temporary resident permits), visitor records, study permits and work permits.

The department said that over time, more application types will be added to the list. However, as of now, those who applied using the new version of the department’s online portal won’t benefit from the move. 

“We may decide to exclude certain portions of the notes on a case-by-case basis due to security, privacy or other concerns,” said the department notice.

According to an Information Commissioner of Canada report to the Parliament last year, 78 per cent of federal access-to-information requests were directed to the Immigration Department in 2022-2023, with eight per cent going to the Canada Border Services Agency. The rest were for all other federal government institutions.  

Source: Canadian immigration refusal letters will now come with officers’ notes

Islamophobia envoy says Mideast war is bringing back anti-Muslim tropes from 9/11

Hard not to disagree but she is silent on whether the nature of some of the demonstrations, their locations and the carrying Hamas related symbols likely also has played a role in reinforcing anti-Muslim tropes:

…Elghawaby spoke to The Canadian Press after the sudden retirement this month of Deborah Lyons, Canada’s special envoy on preserving Holocaust remembrance and combating antisemitism.

Lyons left her post early, saying she felt “despair” over of a growing gulf in Canadian society related to violence in the Middle East, and the failure of many Canadians to find common ground against hate.

Elghawaby said that she and Lyons worked to reinforce “the soul of Canada — a Canada where all of us, with all of our diversities, can belong and fulfil our fullest potential and feel safe to do so.”

Elghawaby said she shares Lyons’s fear that Canadians have “a sense of concern about appearing to be, for example, favouring one community over another.”

She said fighting hate means advancing the shared principle that everyone in Canada should feel safe to express their faith or political views without retribution.

“We do have rules and policies, and we have a Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and we have human-rights codes that should help be our North Star on how we navigate a time of deep social challenge, when it comes to the rise of hate toward any community,” she said.

But Elghawaby pushed back on Lyons’s claim that some Muslims have been uneasy with seeing her work to combat anti-Jewish hate.

Lyons told the Canadian Jewish News that she and Elghawaby tried to work together to counter hate, and had plans to visit provincial education ministers together.

“Neither my community, nor her community, were happy all the time to see us in pictures together,” Lyons said of Elghawaby.

Elghawaby said she’s not aware of Muslims opposing any of her work against anti-Jewish hate.

“I have had no pushback on condemning antisemitism. I have had very good conversations with members of Canadian Jewish communities,” she said.

Elghawaby said many Canadians’ discomfort with confronting the reality on the ground in Gaza is making it impossible to engage in “good faith” dialogue about a path forward.

“Many Canadians of all backgrounds do believe that there is terrible oppression happening in Palestine, that there’s an occupation,” she said. “It’s been described by human rights organizations as apartheid. Genocide scholars, and organizations have called what’s happening now a genocide.

“If we are to have true dialogue, not being able to actually name the situation as it’s being described … by human-rights organizations and experts, it means that it’s a discussion that can’t be had in in fully good faith, because of the effort to almost make invisible or erase what various Canadians are seeing or describing for themselves.”

While Elghawaby said she has no plans to quit before her term ends in February 2027, she acknowledged it’s been “very, very sad and difficult” to see the rise in hate….

Source: Islamophobia envoy says Mideast war is bringing back anti-Muslim tropes from 9/11

Number of US expats to climb throughout 2025

From the citizenship-by-investment marketing firm Aston’s. Still relatively small number for a country with such a large population of millionaires and ultra wealthy:

Number of US expats set to reach 5,000 per year in 2025

The latest analysis from Astons, reveals that the number of US citizens choosing to leave the States is forecast to hit almost 5,000 by the end of this year, marking the highest annual total since 2020.

Astons’ analysis of US Federal Register data* reveals that in 2024 an estimated 4,819 US citizens chose to expatriate themselves and settle in another country.

This marked an annual increase of 47.8%.

Further data shows that following this annual increase, the number of US expats has continued to increase at an incredibly sharp rate, with the first quarter of 2025 recording a rise of 102.4% compared to the final quarter of 2024.

This means that in the first three months of this year alone, an estimated 1,285 US citizens become expatriates.

Based on these recent trends, Astons’ now estimates that by the end of 2025, the total number of US citizens expatriating themselves will reach 4,936 – based on the most conservative of forecasts.

This will be equivalent to an annual increase of 2.4%, and mark the highest number of US citizens leaving America in a single year since 2020, the height of the pandemic.

Senior Consultant for Residency and Citizenship Programs at Astons, Suzanna Uzakova, commented:

“We’re seeing a significant shift in the mindset of affluent Americans who are no longer just looking to invest their money wisely, they’re actively seeking new homes and lifestyles beyond U.S. borders. The rising cost of living, political uncertainty, and a desire for greater personal freedoms are pushing many to explore permanent residency abroad.

Europe is especially attractive thanks to its quality of life, healthcare, and cultural richness. Among all European destinations, Greece has emerged as a standout choice — not just for its beauty, but for its accessible Golden Visa programme, favourable tax incentives, and lifestyle that blends luxury with a much sought-after simplicity.

The investment required to access Greece’s Golden Visa programme starts from just €250,000 provided it goes into real estate – making it one of the most affordable residency-by-investment routes in Europe. For many Americans, Greece offers the perfect balance: EU access, property investment potential, and a relaxed pace of life that feels a world away from the rush back home.”

Data tables and sources
*US expat data sourced from the US IRS (US Federal Register)

Full data tables can be viewed online, here.

Les demandes d’asile au poste frontalier de Lacolle en hausse depuis l’année dernière

Of note:

Le point d’entrée de Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, situé tout près du chemin Roxham et de la frontière entre le Québec et les États-Unis, accueille près de 50 % de demandeurs d’asile de plus depuis le début de l’année, comparativement à la même période en 2024, selon les chiffres de l’Agence des services frontaliers du Canada (ASFC). Pour faire face à cette hausse, l’agence fédérale a loué des « locaux supplémentaires » afin de pouvoir « aider au traitement des demandeurs d’asile ».

« En cas d’afflux de demandeurs d’asile nécessitant des locaux supplémentaires, l’ASFC met en place des plans d’urgence en matière d’infrastructure », précise l’agence fédérale dans une déclaration écrite transmise au Devoir.

Selon les chiffres fournis par l’ASFC, 10 724 demandes d’asile ont été reçues au point d’entrée de Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle entre le 1er janvier et le 27 juillet 2025. Durant la même période en 2024, 5077 demandes d’asile avaient été reçues.

Le mois de juillet 2025 (prenant fin le 27 juillet dans le cadre de la récolte de données) fut le plus occupé, avec 3089 demandes. Pendant la même période en 2024, 613 demandes d’asile avaient été enregistrées. Pour 2025, juillet est suivi du mois d’avril, avec 2733 demandes, contre 670 en 2024.

Les mois de janvier (560) et février (755) 2025 sont les deux seuls mois ayant vu moins de demandes qu’en 2024 (respectivement 818 et 859)…

Source: Les demandes d’asile au poste frontalier de Lacolle en hausse depuis l’année dernière

The Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle entry point, located very close to Roxham Road and the border between Quebec and the United States, has received nearly 50% more asylum seekers since the beginning of the year, compared to the same period in 2024, according to figures from the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA). To cope with this increase, the federal agency rented “additional premises” in order to be able to “help in the treatment of asylum seekers”.

“In the event of an influx of asylum seekers requiring additional premises, the CBSA is putting in place emergency infrastructure plans,” says the federal agency in a written statement sent to Le Devoir.

According to figures provided by the CBSA, 10,724 asylum applications were received at the Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle entry point between January 1 and July 27, 2025. During the same period in 2024, 5,077 asylum applications were received.

The month of July 2025 (ending on July 27 as part of the data collection) was the busiest, with 3089 requests. During the same period in 2024, 613 asylum applications were registered. For 2025, July is followed by April, with 2733 applications, compared to 670 in 2024.

The months of January (560) and February (755) 2025 are the only two months with fewer requests than in 2024 (818 and 859 respectively)…