Colby Cosh: Supreme Court to decide which comes first — Crown oath or Sikh faith

Commentary more nuanced than the header:

…Over the remainder of the 19th century, the great hero of world atheism, Charles Bradlaugh, fought successfully in England for the principle that oaths could be replaced by “affirmations,” allowing unbelievers a loophole into political life and all secular professions. This option is in fact available under the Alberta Legal Profession Act, and was given to Wirring, but the difference in wording between “swear” and “affirm” didn’t seem to assuage his religious feelings. The core problem seems to be the notion of “allegiance,” but at common law all citizens were understood to owe allegiance to the sovereign, as part of a reciprocal obligation, whether we like it or not. Maybe this is some of the meat left on the bone that the Supreme Court apparently hopes to gnaw; I don’t know that anyone expected them to give leave to an appeal of Wirringat all.

Source: Colby Cosh: Supreme Court to decide which comes first — Crown oath or Sikh faith

Lederman: The delay for a Palestinian theatre artist’s visa is a shame

Indeed:

…The Cultch attracted protests earlier this year for mounting Soldiers of Tomorrow, written and performed by Israeli-Canadian Itai Erdal who served in the IDF (and is strongly opposed to the Israeli occupation). Ms. Redfern stood her ground then, and she’s moving heaven and Earth now to bring The Horse of Jenin to Canada. She understands the important role art can play in understanding human catastrophes. 

This moment demands this kind of theatre, whether you agree with the artist or not. Any concern that this play about a boy and a sculpture will serve as some sort of Trojan horse for a political message would be absurd. That message is everywhere, anyway. Canadian audiences should be able to hear it from, well, the horse’s mouth. 

Source: The delay for a Palestinian theatre artist’s visa is a shame

Khan: We need solidarity in the face of Islamophobia

As we do in the face of antisemitism and other forms of hate:

…Local communities can play a key role in strengthening social cohesion. This was demonstrated by the good people of Clarington, who came together at a town hall to support the harassed Muslim family, and stand firmly against fear-mongering. 

Human connection is a powerful currency in this more isolated digital age, as we can learn we share much in common. Our hearts, like this land, are expansive enough to offer comfort and solidarity in the face of hatred. The Clarington approach can serve as a blueprint for strengthening communities across Canada against Islamophobia, antisemitism, and hate in general.

Source: We need solidarity in the face of Islamophobia

Le Devoir Éditorial | Vivre ensemble, c’est tout

Good editorial:

…C’est devenu un objet d’étude en soi, avec la montée en force des médiations interculturelles, ici et ailleurs. La grande université californienne de Berkeley s’est même dotée d’un indice d’inclusivité qui lui permet de mesurer nos progrès, d’identifier les bonnes pratiques comme les mauvaises, celles qui crispent les sociétés et les divisent. Le Canada s’y classe au 15e rang, en sandwich entre l’Allemagne et le Danemark. Tout au sommet, on trouve la Nouvelle-Zélande, le Portugal et les Pays-Bas.

Ses chercheurs observent la constante suivante : l’agitation, les remous et les contre-courants feront toujours partie de la vie en collectivité. Comme il ne sert à rien de s’acharner à vouloir dompter une rivière agitée pour en faire un long fleuve tranquille, il leur apparaît plus utile de jeter des ponts sur son dos afin que tous puissent y faire leur chemin et mettre leurs histoires en commun.

En d’autres mots, l’accord parfait n’adviendra pas et n’a même jamais existé. Il faut définir les valeurs communes qui nous lient et bâtir à partir d’elles, et non contre celles qui nous divisent. Les prochaines années s’annoncent politiquement, économiquement, climatiquement et humainement instables. C’est à ce défi immense mais ô combien prometteur que nous voudrions voir nos partis politiques s’atteler en prévision de la prochaine campagne.

Il est vrai qu’aller vers l’autre est exigeant. Cela vient avec des inconforts, des doutes, des incompréhensions, des appréhensions, voire de l’insécurité. Cet « inconfort interculturel », s’il est bien attesté, n’est heureusement pas éternel, nous enseigne la professeure agrégée de psychologie Marina M. Doucerain. Il a même « tendance à s’estomper à mesure que les gens accumulent les interactions interculturelles ».

Comme c’est en forgeant qu’on devient forgeron, la science nous enseigne ainsi que c’est en multipliant les contacts avec les autres qu’on devient… humains. Voilà une riche leçon pour qui veut passer d’un « imaginaire défensif » à un « imaginaire contributif », pour reprendre l’habile formule du professeur émérite Khadiyatoulah Fall parue récemment dans Le Devoir.

C’est aussi l’occasion de revisiter la pensée du regretté sociologue et philosophe Edgar Morin, pour qui la polarisation restera toujours le symptôme d’une « pensée mutilée » qui réduit le monde à des oppositions binaires. Face à cette fragmentation, il oppose la finesse d’une pensée complexe exigeant de relier les contraires plutôt que de les séparer. « Nous avons trop bien appris à séparer, observe-t-il. Il vaut mieux apprendre à relier. Relier, c’est-à-dire pas seulement établir bout à bout une connexion, mais établir une connexion qui se fasse en boucle. »

Travailler à relier, n’est-ce pas là le début d’une promesse électorale porteuse d’avenir ?

Source: Éditorial | Vivre ensemble, c’est tout

… It has become an object of study in itself, with the rise of intercultural mediations, here and elsewhere. The major California University of Berkeley has even acquired an inclusiveness index that allows it to measure our progress, to identify good and bad practices, those that tense and divide societies. Canada ranks 15th, sandwiched between Germany and Denmark. At the very top, we find New Zealand, Portugal and the Netherlands.

Its researchers observe the following constant: agitation, turmoil and counter-currents will always be part of community life. Since it is useless to insist on wanting to tame a rough river to make it a long quiet river, it seems more useful to them to throw bridges on his back so that everyone can make their way there and share their stories.

In other words, the perfect agreement will not happen and has never even existed. We must define the common values that bond us and build from them, and not against those that divide us. The next few years promise to be politically, economically, climatically and humanly unstable. It is to this immense but very promising challenge that we would like to see our political parties tackle in anticipation of the next campaign.

It is true that going to the other is demanding. This comes with discomfort, doubts, misunderstandings, apprehensions, even insecurity. This “intercultural discomfort”, if it is well attested, is fortunately not eternal, teaches us associate professor of psychology Marina M. Doucerain. It even “tends to fade as people accumulate intercultural interactions”.

As it is by forging that we become a forge, science teaches us that it is by multiplying contacts with others that we become… human. This is a rich lesson for those who want to move from a “defensive imaginary” to a “contributory imaginary”, to use the skillful formula of Professor Emeritus Khadiyatoulah Fall recently published in Le Devoir.

It is also an opportunity to revisit the thought of the late sociologist and philosopher Edgar Morin, for whom polarization will always remain the symptom of a “mutilated thought” that reduces the world to binary oppositions. Faced with this fragmentation, he opposes the finesse of a complex thought demanding to connect the opposites rather than to separate them. “We have learned too well to separate,” he observes. It is better to learn to connect. Link, i.e. not only establish an end-to-end connection, but establish a connection that is made in a loop. ”

Working to connect, isn’t this the beginning of an electoral promise with a future?

Trump’s Déjà-Vu Moment on Birthright Citizenship

More political posturing and material for the courts:

…Yesterday, Trump attempted to do some of the same things via new executive orders. One is intended to deny automatic citizenship to children born to people living in the United States while working for a foreign government and children of people declared to be terrorists or adversaries of the U.S. It would also deny citizenship to people born in U.S. territories if Congress passes a proposed lawallowing that, creating a new group of stateless people. The second order is intended to prevent the practice of “birth tourism,” in which people visiting the United States on tourist visas give birth to babies who are then U.S. citizens.

Legal experts and advocates say the orders are unconstitutional, and they are certain to be challenged in court. Trump’s loss at the Supreme Court seems to make these orders a long shot. As Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in his opinion for the Court, “children born of parents unlawfully or temporarily present in the United States” satisfy the relevant conditions and thus “under the Constitution, they are citizens at birth.”

The language in the orders about “alien enemies” is another likely area for dispute, not because anyone is eager to welcome the children of bona fide adversaries but because this administration has made absurd claims about illegal immigration constituting an “invasion,” which makes no sense on its face and has been rejected by federal judges.

Trump’s announcement of the orders at the White House yesterday was full of fabrications, exaggerations, and lies. Trump claimed that the Fourteenth Amendment “was meant for the babies of slaves. It was—it was right after—one week or two weeks after the Civil War ended.” In fact, it passed three years later, in 1868. The presidential adviser Stephen Miller echoed the same idea, saying that the amendment “had no other meaning and purpose outside of that, and that’s been clear, obviously, since the day that it was passed.” When a politician uses the word obviously—like frankly—that’s a good sign that what follows will be neither obvious nor true. If this had been obvious since 1868, the U.S. wouldn’t have acted otherwise for more than a century, and the Supreme Court would have ruled in favor of the administration….

Source: Trump’s Déjà-Vu Moment on Birthright Citizenship

C.D. Howe: Better Evidence, Better Spending: A Call for Stronger Federal Program Evaluation

Hard not to agree with most of their recommendations:

…Drawing on presentations and discussions from the C.D. Howe Institute’s 2026 Workshop on Strengthening the Federal Evaluation Function, the report recommends making value for money assessments a mandatory part of federal program evaluations, based on rigorous benefit-cost and cost-effectiveness analysis where appropriate. It also proposes creating an independent evaluator general to help departments build evaluation capacity and improve the consistency and quality of federal evaluations. 

“Governments shouldn’t simply ask whether a program achieves its objectives. They also need to know whether it delivers enough public benefit to justify the resources devoted to it,” says Robidoux, former Senior Associate Deputy Minister at Employment and Social Development Canada. “When fiscal pressures intensify, stronger value for money evaluations give decision-makers better evidence to determine where each additional taxpayer dollar can have the greatest impact.”

The report also recommends expanding the evaluation framework to include spending delivered through the tax system, incorporating a value for money test earlier in the approval process for new programs, making greater use of linked administrative data, and replacing the rigid five-year evaluation cycle with a more flexible approach when programs have already been thoroughly assessed and remain largely unchanged. 

“Too often, federal evaluations focus on how program participants are impacted – without identifying the program’s contribution to these outcomes – rather than on whether programs provide value for money when all benefits and costs are accounted for,” says Lester, Fellow-in-Residence, C.D. Howe Institute. “Policymakers also need to know whether a program delivers enough value to justify the tax dollars required to fund it. Stronger evidence will help them make better spending decisions.”

Ottawa describes its overall expenditure management system as “designed to ensure that all programs are focused on results, provide value for taxpayers’ money and are aligned with the government’s priorities and responsibilities.” 

Making value for money evaluations of programs mandatory while allowing time to build capacity, appointing an evaluator general, and broadening the scope of the evaluation policy would be big steps toward making this worthy goal a reality, conclude the authors….

Source: Better Evidence, Better Spending: A Call for Stronger Federal Program Evaluation

Classified report reveals how India’s Bishnoi gang uses Canada’s student visa program

Another example of policy failure:

…A classified intelligence report obtained by Global News reveals the Bishnoi gang’s Canadian franchise has relied heavily on Indian youths who, like Brar, entered the country on student visas.

Written by the Canada Border Services Agency, the report cites the gang’s “growing operational presence in Canada” and “demonstrated use of Canada’s immigration programs for criminal purposes.”

“Investigations increasingly identify Indian foreign nationals on study permits and work permits as participants in these organized criminal activities,” the CBSA’s Intelligence and Investigations Directorate wrote.

“The sustained expansion of Bishnoi-linked extortions and the involvement of student permit and work permit holders raises significant concerns for CBSA operations.”

The “Tactical Guide,” titled “The Bishnoi Gang: An Emerging Threat in Canada,” was circulated in December 2025 to help immigration officers tackle the crime group as it preyed upon the country’s South Asian communities.

Although classified, a copy made public by the court shows how the government’s controversial foreign student program may have contributed to Canada’s Indian gang problem….

Source: EXCLUSIVE: Classified report reveals how India’s Bishnoi gang uses Canada’s student visa program

Globe editorial: Thoughts and prayers, Canadian style

Valid critique. Time to stop using “thoughts and prayers” language with any such incident, no matter the issue or group:

…So how to turn back this growing tide of hatred? As we have argued before, that effort has to begin with understanding, and speaking, the truth: Antizionism is fuelling the rise in antisemitism. The rejection of Israel, of its very right to exist, has become the growth medium for the contagion of antisemitism. The test of courage for any political leader is whether they are willing to speak this truth. Prime Minister Mark Carney failed that test in June, even as he tried to provide comfort to the Jewish-Canadian community.

Toronto Mayor Olivia Chow has failed even more spectacularly. In fairness, Ms. Chow has spoken out against anti-Israel protests being staged in the heart of the Jewish-Canadian neighbourhood near Bathurst and Sheppard in north Toronto. And, of course, she has offered her thoughts and prayers, Canadian style, in condemnation of incidents such as the attack on Kiva’s.

But Ms. Chow has, through her actions, shown where her sympathies lie. The mayor refused to attend a flag-raising ceremony for Israel’s national day in May, 2024, saying such an event was “divisive.” She also declined to take part in the annual Walk for Israel in June of this year.

Yet, the mayor had no problem with blurting out “Free Palestine” – the rallying slogan of those antizionist rallies – during the Pride Parade in late June. 

The mayor’s office did not respond when asked last week why the flag-raising event was divisive, but reciting the Free Palestine slogan is not a problem. Ms. Chow owes Torontonians, particularly Jewish Torontonians, an explanation.

Does she, for instance, support the right of Israel to exist? Or is she in line with the hate-infused catechism (recited most weeks near Bathurst and Sheppard) that deems Israel a pariah state?

Until she does clarify, her thoughts and prayers will ring hollow.

Source: Thoughts and prayers, Canadian style

Rempel Garner: Integration must be immigration’s first principle.

Always interesting to see how the Conservatives are engaging on immigration and citizenship. Needless to say, they favour the citizenship guide which has remained unchanged since the Harper years (5 Liberal immigration ministers and counting):

…The Liberals’ lowering of language knowledge standards signalled that a common language is not necessary for national unity or to fully participate in Canadian society. The Liberals’ prioritization of business groups that profit from large numbers of low-skilled temporary foreign workers signals that it’s okay for Canada to develop a caste system of labour. Their tolerance of violent foreign ideology has led to increases in acts of hate perpetrated on Canadian soil, particularly towards the Jewish community. Their abysmal screening processes have allowed agents of terrorist regimes to enter Canada and normalize and spread violent foreign ideology and gang activity within Canada’s borders. The Liberals’ recent Bill C-3, which allows Canadian citizenship to be passed down ad infinitum to people with no significant connection to Canada, erodes the value of Canadian citizenship. Their attempt to erase Canada’s national symbols says there was no national identity for newcomers to integrate into to begin with. And their decision to bring in too many people too quickly for jobs, housing, healthcare and other social supports to keep pace has led to scarcity and its negative competitive consequences.

But the most damaging part of a decade of Liberal destruction of the true first principle of Canada’s immigration system is the impact on people who came to Canada and upheld their end of the deal. These folks comprise the vast, overwhelming majority of immigrants to our country. When the Liberals allow others to get away with breaking the rules, they risk entire communities getting tarred with the same brush.

This is why Prime Minister Mark Carney’s recent false claim that “they have taken back control of immigration” is so dangerous. The lived experience of many Canadians says otherwise. On any given morning there is another major story of the system failing (today was no different). 

And integration metrics still do not drive immigration policy.

The good news is that this state of affairs is reversible, which is why Canada’s Conservatives have spent the past year proposing major legislative and policy changes. Rules must be enforced, and the safeguards that once ensured Canada’s immigration system prioritized building the Canadian people and our national identity must be restored. Expect more to come in the fall.

Immigration policy that forgets its first duty – to build and strengthen the Canadian people – will eventually unmake the country it claims to serve.

That cannot be allowed to come to pass.

Source: Integration must be immigration’s first principle.

Under Hegseth, Women’s Share of Top Military Promotions Plunged This Year

Not surprising and not justified:

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s blocking of promotions for high-ranking women in the military has contributed to the lowest percentage of such nominations for women in at least 25 years, according to a New York Times analysis.

Eight of 201 candidates for high-ranking posts this year have been women, or 4 percent — less than half the average percentage of the past 10 years.

More women could still be promoted this year. And the number of women nominated for promotion in any year is relatively small, so the percentages can fluctuate based on a few individual officers. In 2012, for example, the percentage of high-ranking nominations going to women also fell below 5 percent.

But the proportion of female nominees would be higher in 2026 if not for Mr. Hegseth’s actions. He has blocked at least 40 high-ranking promotions from reaching the Senate in recent months — some for white men, but about half for women and people of color, The Times has reported….

Source: Under Hegseth, Women’s Share of Top Military Promotions Plunged This Year