Latest numbers and demand resulting for C-3, suggesting possible higher numbers than presented by IRCC and PBO, and a reminder how overly generous it is compared to other countries. From Washington Post, indicating interest given large numbers of American residents affected:
….Late last year, the Canadian government amended the Citizenship Act to grant Canadian citizenship to a wider pool of people seeking dual citizenship through their family lineage. Before the revised law went into effect on Dec. 15, the country limited Canadian citizenship to the first-generation children of a Canadian parent. Now, all generations who were born outside of Canada and have direct Canadian ancestry can become Canadian citizens, as long as they possess the correct documents andfall within the correct legal provisions.
“The grandkids can get citizenship, and the great-grandkids can get citizenship from Canada, even if they never set foot in Canada,” said Basil Mohr-Elzeki, managing partner at Henley & Partners, a firm that specializes in residency and citizenship planning.
The rule stems from a December 2023 decision by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice that deemed the first-generation cutoff unconstitutional. The law restores citizenship to those beyond the first generation born abroad….
A surge of applications
Since the change in qualifications, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) has experienced a bump in applications. In January, the agency said it received 8,897 applications, up from 5,940 a year ago. Between Dec. 15, 2025, and Jan. 31, it processed about 6,280 applications, out of 12,430 received, and confirmed 1,480 new citizens by descent under the new act.
“The IRCC said the processing period is about 10 months. Bart said more complicated cases, such as ones requiring DNA testing and assistance from the firm’s staff genealogist, can stretch for years. A straightforward application takes about a year or more, unless it is expedited, in which case it can take as little as a few weeks. Bart warned, however, that the wait time could grow exponentially with the recent high demand.
“Processing is really becoming backlogged because so many people are wanting to qualify,” she said.
The government agency, which posts the estimated processing time online, also shares the number of people awaiting a decision — 56,300 on April 7.
If Canadians are worried about an influx of new citizens, they shouldn’t be. Peter Spiro, a law professor at Temple University in Philadelphia, does not anticipate a rush of newly minted Canadians crossing the border.
Spiro, who specializes in international, immigration and constitutional law, describes dual citizenship as a form of insurance. You may never have to use your second citizenship, he said, but in case you need it, Canada will always welcome you home.”
…In Quebec, official documents dating back to 1621 and up to 100 years ago are kept by the Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec (BAnQ), with more recent records available through the Directeur de l’état civil.
Sarah Hanahem, an archivist with the BAnQ office in Montreal, said while there’s always been an interest from Americans looking into their ancestry, requests for certified copies have exploded.
“In January 2025, we had 32 requests for certified copies of vital records and this year in January 2026, we’ve had over 1,000,” she said, adding most of those requests were made by Americans.
In statements to CBC, other archives across the country, including New Brunswick, British Columbia, Newfoundland and Ontario, have also seen a sizable increase in requests from the same time last year.
Because of the sudden surge in demand, Hanahem warned that international applicants should expect delays.
The priority, she said, is to fulfil requests by Quebec residents.“BAnQ is a government entity and we are paid with Quebec tax dollars.”
But more than that, Hanahem said the process itself is lengthy and can involve a lot of research.
There are sometimes discrepancies with the spelling of names, some of which might have changed over time, she said. Other times, critical information like which parish someone was born in, is unknown or key dates are approximate when actual dates are required.
“We have to go back to the original register,” Hanamen said, explaining some of the bound volumes are very old and need to be handled carefully. …
Karas continues to argue, justifiably, against birth tourism.
While the legislative change in simple, implementation is more challenging given Canada’s federal system where birth registries and vital stats agencies are provincial responsibly. Former IRCC ministers Kenney and Alexander abandoned plans in 2012 given these difficulties and lack of provincial agreement: see my What the previous government learned about birth tourism:
…Ending “birthright by default” in Canada is not about closing the door to immigrants – it is about closing a loophole. A straightforward amendment to the Citizenship Act to require that at least one parent be a Canadian citizen or permanent resident for a child born in Canada to automatically obtain citizenship would dissuade birth tourism overnight. Genuine newcomers would still be welcome through our immigration channels, and children born in Canada could still acquire citizenship once a parent becomes a citizen or via a naturalization process. This reform would protect our social and health systems from unfair burdens and ensure that citizenship is reserved for those with a real stake in Canada. Notably, Canadians across the spectrum support such a change: in one poll, 64% of respondents agreed that birthright citizenship should be denied to babies born to tourists or short-term visitors.
Canada’s generosity should not be misused as a shortcut to a “dream passport.” Ending unconditional birthright citizenship is a prudent, necessary step to safeguard the value of Canadian nationality. It would shut down an entire boutique industry of “passport babies” that has thrived at our expense, particularly drawing in wealthy travel-from-abroad clients. It would affirm the principle that Canadian citizenship is earned through genuine connection – by blood, by upbringing, or by naturalization – not by accident of birth location. Dozens of other successful, welcoming countries have already made this change, striking a balance between openness and fairness. Canada can do the same. Closing this loophole would uphold the integrity of our immigration system, protect public resources, and underscore that being Canadian is a privilege to be gained through true attachment to this country, not purchased through birth tourism. It is about fairness: citizenship should be a deeper bond than just being born in the right place at the right time.
Interesting how this view has emerged that this possibility was not raised in any substantive way during the parliamentary and other discussions of C-3 and predecessor bills, with discussion focused on retroactive application to the second generation born abroad, not earlier generations. Examples include Idées | Après la loi C-3, un réveil franco-américain, and the CBC article below this commentary, both with respect to early waves of Quebec emigration to the USA.
As the CBC story makes clear, considerable work is still required to document the family links, which I can appreciate having done some genealogy myself. IRCC may face challenges in verification.
As in all cases of “lost Canadians,” the degree to which individuals will wish to avail themselves of Canadian citizenship will likely be significantly less than the overall number of Canadian expatriates in the second generation and beyond. But given that most descendants of Canadians reside in the USA, there appears to be a Trump push factor.
2027 data will provide an indication:
…Stakeholders in citizenship law are now wondering how the new law will be interpreted and applied. An increasing consensus is emerging that the potential beneficiaries could include anyone who has an ancestor who was born in Canada, no matter how far back – even before 1867. It may be that many people in New England (who have ancestors from the Maritimes) or even Louisiana (who can trace their lineage back to the expulsion of Acadians in the 18th century) may now have claims to Canadian citizenship.
Not included in Bill C-3 are any requirements for security checks on those who would claim citizenship under the new rules. Nor are they required to provide police certificates or pass language or knowledge tests. According to the Act, “Canadians who are currently born citizens by descent are not required to undergo security or criminality screenings in order to be or remain citizens.”
Moreover, a committee briefing from the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration notes that most people currently excluded from citizenship because of the first-generation limit were born after 2009, when it came into force. This cohort consists largely of minors aged 16 and under in 2025 and are generally deemed to be lower risk for security or criminality purposes.
In fact, Bill C-3 opens the door to citizenship for many people born before as well as after 2009. Among them are many people who might give rise to security concerns. But since they are now deemed Canadian citizens by law rather than by grant, they do not need to submit to security checks. This raises serious concerns in an increasingly dangerous world.
Equally important is the broader issue of what makes a person Canadian. By opening the citizenship door so widely, it diminishes the importance of an inherited history and a shared stake in the future.
While the government aimed for prospective uniformity, by sidestepping retroactive changes it may have inadvertently bolstered the case that Canada truly is “the first post-national state.”
Randolph Hahn is a partner with Garson Immigration Law and has practiced exclusively in citizenship and immigration law for many years. He is a former chair of the Citizenship and Immigration Section of the Ontario Bar Association and is the associate editor of the Immigration Law Reporter. He has authored many professional papers.
Millions of Americans can now claim Canadian citizenship by descent. But they have to prove it
…In Quebec, official documents dating back to 1621 and up to 100 years ago are kept by the Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec (BAnQ), with more recent records available through the Directeur de l’état civil.
Sarah Hanahem, an archivist with the BAnQ office in Montreal, said while there’s always been an interest from Americans looking into their ancestry, requests for certified copies have exploded.
“In January 2025, we had 32 requests for certified copies of vital records and this year in January 2026, we’ve had over 1,000,” she said, adding most of those requests were made by Americans.
In statements to CBC, other archives across the country, including New Brunswick, British Columbia, Newfoundland and Ontario, have also seen a sizable increase in requests from the same time last year.
Because of the sudden surge in demand, Hanahem warned that international applicants should expect delays.
The priority, she said, is to fulfil requests by Quebec residents.“BAnQ is a government entity and we are paid with Quebec tax dollars.”
But more than that, Hanahem said the process itself is lengthy and can involve a lot of research.
There are sometimes discrepancies with the spelling of names, some of which might have changed over time, she said. Other times, critical information like which parish someone was born in, is unknown or key dates are approximate when actual dates are required.
“We have to go back to the original register,” Hanamen said, explaining some of the bound volumes are very old and need to be handled carefully. …
One of the frustrations during C-3 hearings on the removal of the first-generation citizenship transmission restriction was the weak data presented by the government and the overly general but nevertheless useful PBO analysis.
IRCC did, however, indicate some 4,000 interim applications had been received and shared the data regarding these applications: gender, age, country of residence.
This working paper presents the analysis for citizenship data nerds.
Appears from today’s hearings that SCOTUS is inclined to agree with Bouie’s assessment:
…It is not so much that revisionism is on its face outrageous, but that any alternative reading of the citizenship clause must strike at the heart of the rejection of Dred Scott. On this count, Trump and his defenders fail. Their vision of citizenship — which would plunge countless children into statelessness as a permanently subordinate class — would bring Dred Scott back from the dead. And it would do this in support of a political agenda that seeks nothing less than the reconstruction of race hierarchy and the rank domination of despised minorities.
The evidence in favor of the traditional view of the citizenship clause is overwhelming. To rule otherwise is to say, in essence, that two plus two equals five. Which is to say that if the Supreme Court decides in favor of Trump, it will have less to do with law or history than the political power of the president and his movement.
Trump v. Barbara, then, is a stark reminder that the struggle over constitutional meaning involves the entire nation. The revisionist case rests less on new evidence than it does on Trump’s claim to embody the nation and its desires. If he is ascendant, then the people must want a closed, cloistered society.
Articles and opinions related to citizenship that I found of interest in March:
Idées | Après la loi C-3, un réveil franco-américain
This is the second article that has focussed on potential applicants from early waves of Canadian francophone emigrants to the USA. This possibility was never raised I believe in either House or Senate hearings on C-3 and its predecessors, and the focus and discussion was on second generation, not earlier generations (Indian media did flag possibility). I will be making a data request in 2027 and have asked IRCC whether their data collection will distinguish between second and earlier generations:
…“Pour comprendre l’onde de choc, il faut revenir au fameux « plafond » : la limite de première génération. En clair, les enfants nés à l’étranger de parents canadiens pouvaient être citoyens canadiens, mais ne pouvaient pas transmettre automatiquement leur citoyenneté à leurs propres enfants si eux aussi naissaient à l’étranger. La chaîne s’arrêtait après une génération née hors du pays.
Une décision rendue en Ontario en décembre 2023 a jugé ce régime inconstitutionnel dans certains cas, ce qui a forcé Ottawa à corriger le tir. C-3 permet donc la citoyenneté au-delà de la première génération née à l’étranger, mais en posant une condition de « lien substantiel » : la citoyenneté peut circuler plus loin dans la chaîne familiale à condition qu’il y ait une ancre réelle au pays, démontrée par 1095 jours — trois ans — de présence physique cumulative au Canada.
Et voilà ce qui change tout : pour beaucoup, il ne s’agit pas de « demander » la citoyenneté comme un privilège, mais de faire reconnaître un statut qui s’appuie maintenant sur des règles précises afin d’obtenir une preuve de citoyenneté. Psychologiquement, ce n’est pas la même posture.”
Pourquoi la Nouvelle-Angleterre s’enflamme
Si cette loi fait battre le cœur de la Nouvelle-Angleterre, ce n’est pas un hasard. Entre 1830 et 1970, près d’un million de Québécois ont traversé la frontière — surtout vers les villes industrielles — pour travailler dans les filatures et les manufactures. Le résultat démographique est immense : leurs descendants représentent aujourd’hui près de dix millions d’Américains.
Cette diaspora a longtemps été racontée comme une épopée ouvrière : un peuple qui quitte la terre, cherche du travail, construit des quartiers, des paroisses, des clubs, fondent des journaux. Mais c’est aussi une histoire de hiérarchie sociale : des Canadiens français devenus main-d’œuvre bon marché, comme tant d’autres groupes dans l’Amérique industrielle. Ce double héritage explique la charge émotionnelle du moment : la loi C-3 ne touche pas seulement un cas juridique ; elle réveille une mémoire.
Surtout, elle arrive des années après qu’une fierté franco-américaine s’est reconstruite « par en bas » : balados, blogues, festivals, initiatives locales. Parmi ceux qui s’activent aujourd’hui, il y a des amis à moi qui animent un balado franco-américain très écouté, d’autres qui ont fondé le PoutineFest du New Hampshire — devenu assez solide pour essaimer, avec des éditions à Burlington, au Vermont, et dans “le Maine — et d’autres encore qui tiennent depuis longtemps des blogues franco-américains. La fierté n’a pas attendu Ottawa. Mais l’accès, lui, oui.
L’Amérique pousse, le Québec attire
Pourquoi maintenant ? Parce que l’Amérique inquiète. Dans mes échanges, je sens moins une mode qu’une fatigue : fatigue politique, fatigue institutionnelle, fatigue culturelle. La citoyenneté canadienne devient un filet de sécurité pour certains : un passeport, oui, mais surtout une option familiale.
Mais réduire ce mouvement à une fuite serait une erreur. Beaucoup ne parlent pas d’abord de soins de santé ou d’élections. Ils parlent de langue. Ils parlent d’immersion. Ils parlent d’un désir de vivre — enfin — dans un endroit où le français n’est pas un folklore, mais un espace public.
Plusieurs se disent fièrement Franco-Américains. D’autres se décrivent carrément comme « Québécois », avec ce mélange de fierté et d’envie : envie d’une société qu’ils perçoivent comme plus cohérente, plus collective, moins brutale. Et ils sont lucides : tous ne pourront pas transférer leur carrière ici. Les avocats, les fiscalistes, ceux qui ont des professions encadrées le savent. Pourtant, ils avancent, parce que ce n’est pas seulement une équation économique : c’est une trajectoire.
Bienvenue chez vous »… mais préparons-nous
Soyons francs : cette loi a un impact particulier — et probablement disproportionné — sur les descendants de Québécois aux États-Unis. Elle ne déclenchera pas automatiquement une migration de masse. Les démarches restent exigeantes : prouver la filiation, retrouver les bons documents, faire valider les chaînes.
Mais la direction du courant est claire. Et le Québec doit regarder cette réalité en face : une partie de cette diaspora va frapper à sa porte, non pas comme des étrangers, mais comme des « revenants » — avec une attache réelle, un imaginaire familial, parfois un français brisé, parfois un français intact.
La question n’est donc pas seulement de savoir combien viendront, mais comment on les accueillera. Oui, la citoyenneté donne des droits. Mais l’installation au Québec implique aussi des devoirs, des choix, un ancrage. Et si une partie de cette vague devient une immigration durable, elle peut aussi être un gain : démographique, économique, culturel — et, franchement, linguistique, si ces nouveaux arrivants viennent précisément chercher le français.
Alors, oui : Québécois et Canadiens français, préparez-vous à dire « bienvenue chez vous ». Mais disons-le intelligemment : avec des parcours d’accueil réalistes, des ponts de francisation adaptés et un discours public qui évite de transformer des cousins en boucs émissaires.
Parce qu’au fond, C-3 ne fait pas que corriger une incohérence juridique. Elle réactive une vieille histoire : celle d’un peuple parti travailler ailleurs… et dont les descendants, un siècle plus tard, demandent non pas la permission, mais la reconnaissance de revenir toucher le fil.”
Rémi Francœur Franco-Américain, l’auteur est analyste politique et ancien directeur de campagnes politiques au New Hampshire. Il est installé à Montréal depuis 2015.
…”To understand the shock wave, we must return to the famous “ceiling”: the first generation limit. Clearly, children born abroad to Canadian parents could be Canadian citizens, but could not automatically transmit their citizenship to their own children if they were also born abroad. The channel stopped after a generation born outside the country.
A decision rendered in Ontario in December 2023 ruled this regime unconstitutional in some cases, forcing Ottawa to correct the situation. C-3 therefore allows citizenship beyond the first generation born abroad, but by placing a condition of “substantial link”: citizenship can circulate further in the family chain provided that there is a real anchor in the country, demonstrated by 1095 days – three years – of cumulative physical presence in Canada.
And this is what changes everything: for many, it is not a question of “asking” citizenship as a privilege, but of having a status recognized that is now based on precise rules in order to obtain proof of citizenship. Psychologically, it’s not the same posture.”
Why New England is on fire
If this law makes the heart of New England beat, it is no coincidence. Between 1830 and 1970, nearly a million Quebecers crossed the border — mainly to industrial cities — to work in spinning mills and factories. The demographic result is immense: their descendants now represent nearly ten million Americans.
This diaspora has long been told as a workers’ epic: a people who leave the earth, look for work, build neighborhoods, parishes, clubs, found newspapers. But it is also a story of social hierarchy: French Canadians who have become cheap labor, like so many other groups in industrial America. This double legacy explains the emotional charge of the moment: Law C-3 does not only affect a legal case; it awakens a memory.
Above all, it comes years after a Franco-American pride has rebuilt itself “from the bottom”: podcasts, blogs, festivals, local initiatives. Among those who are active today, there are friends of mine who host a much listened to Franco-American podcast, others who founded the PutinFest of New Hampshire – which has become solid enough to swarm, with editions in Burlington, Vermont, and in “Maine – and others who have long held Franco-American blogs. Pride did not wait for Ottawa. But access, yes.
America is pushing, Quebec attracts
Why now? Because America is worried. In my exchanges, I feel less a fashion than a fatigue: political fatigue, institutional fatigue, cultural fatigue. Canadian citizenship becomes a safety net for some: a passport, yes, but above all a family option.
But reducing this movement to a leak would be a mistake. Many do not first talk about health care or elections. They speak language. They talk about immersion. They speak of a desire to live – finally – in a place where French is not a folklore, but a public space.
Many proudly call themselves Franco-Americans. Others describe themselves flatly as “Quebecers”, with this mixture of pride and envy: desire for a society that they perceive as more coherent, more collective, less brutal. And they are lucid: not all will be able to transfer their career here. Lawyers, tax specialists, those who have supervised professions know it. However, they move forward, because it is not just an economic equation: it is a trajectory.
Welcome home”… but let’s get ready
Let’s be frank: this law has a particular — and probably disproportionate — impact on the descendants of Quebecers in the United States. It will not automatically trigger a mass migration. The steps remain demanding: prove filiation, find the right documents, have the channels validated.
But the direction of the current is clear. And Quebec must face this reality: part of this diaspora will knock on its door, not as foreigners, but as “revenants” – with a real attachment, a family imagination, sometimes a broken Frenchman, sometimes an intact Frenchman.
The question is therefore not only how many will come, but how they will be welcomed. Yes, citizenship gives rights. But settling in Quebec also implies duties, choices, an anchorage. And if part of this wave becomes sustainable immigration, it can also be a gain: demographic, economic, cultural – and, frankly, linguistic, if these newcomers come precisely for French.
So, yes: Quebecers and French Canadians, get ready to say “welcome home”. But let’s say it intelligently: with realistic welcome paths, adapted francization bridges and a public discourse that avoids turning cousins into scapegoats.
Because basically, C-3 does not only correct a legal inconsistency. It reactivates an old story: that of a people who have gone to work elsewhere… and whose descendants, a century later, ask not for permission, but the recognition of returning to touch the thread.”
Rémi Francœur Franco-American, the author is a political analyst and former director of political campaigns in New Hampshire. It has been based in Montreal since 2015.
Canadians living abroad are calling for increased turnout among overseas voters and arguing that barriers to casting a ballot could be affecting election results.
Looking forward the PROC report and recommendations. In contrast to the USA with relatively strong Republicans and Democrats Abroad, Canadian political parties do not appear to have the same interest although the Liberals seem to have a greater focus that the Conservatives (https://www.conservativesabroad.ca). The Liberals have the expansive multi-generational interpretation of C-3. As in the case of “Lost Canadians” and previous elections, the number who may be interested and vote is likely smaller than advocates believer.
Upcoming analysis on the provincial and country breakdowns for the 2025 election, sample below, Ontario and British Columbia have higher proportions than other provinces:
Timothy Veale, the director of Grits Abroad — an organization aimed at connecting Canadian Liberal voters living worldwide — said nearly five million Canadians live outside the country and roughly 3.5 million of them are eligible to vote.
Veale said the share of non-resident Canadians voting in federal elections is mired in the low single digits. He said the causes include mail-only voting, compressed timelines, uncertainty about ballot arrival and delivery and a lack of outreach from party campaigns.
Daniel Scuka, a member of Grits Abroad living in Germany, said parties need to “wake up” and encourage Canadians overseas to vote. He said Elections Canada could also be directed to do more to support overseas voting.
Veale said federal parties should see overseas voters as an opportunity.
“I’d like to see a politician ask us for their vote,” he said. “In the last election … I don’t think anybody courted any of the five million people living overseas.”
Veale said the system “needs modernization” and Canadians should be able to vote in person at an embassy, consulate or high commission. He also pointed out that several countries allow online voting.
“We have the right to vote and a 37-day election was not designed for people abroad to apply to vote,” he said. “If you get approval, then you have to wait for the ballot to be sent to you, then you have to send it back. And imagine having to navigate over 200 different national postal systems around the world.
“We’ve seen how other countries operate and we can do way better than this. It’s just a matter of will, as I see it.”
Elections Canada said in an email that 101,690 voting kits were issued to electors living outside of Canada in the last general election. Of those, 57,440 were returned on time and tallied….
As Americans in Canada prepare U.S. tax filings, lower citizenship renunciation fee offers a way out
Not to be cynical but given that Democrats abroad tend to be larger than Republicans….
The U.S. government’s decision to decrease its citizenship renunciation fee by more than 80 per cent may result in more Americans in Canada giving up their U.S. citizenship, cross-border tax experts say, as the deadline for Americans abroad to file their taxes approaches.
Earlier this month, the U.S. State Department announced that the consular services fee charged to Americans giving up their citizenship will drop to US$450, down from US$2,350, effective April 13.
Unlike Canada and most other countries, the U.S. bases its tax system on citizenship rather than residency. That means a U.S. citizen must file a U.S. tax return every year regardless of where they live. In addition, the U.S. requires Americans to report on their foreign financial accounts annually.
The deadline for filing a U.S. tax return is April 15, but Americans living abroad receive an automatic filing and payment extension until June 15, and a possible further extension to Oct. 15, if they request it. To avoid interest charges, any taxes are still due by April 15….
Juno News caught this change. Deserves wider reading and concern given “take home test” is a further diminishment and integrity reduction of Canadian citizenship:
The majority of immigrants seeking Canadian citizenship will apply completely through a self-administered online citizenship test, which they will be permitted up to three attempts to pass.
The virtual format for the Canadian citizenship test, popularized throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, is now the default, according to new instructions from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC).
Before 2020, citizenship tests were written in person by default. Applicants were generally given 30 minutes to complete the test. If they failed, they had one opportunity to rewrite it before being referred to a knowledge or language hearing.
The IRCC released updated information on Monday, formalizing a 45-minute time allotment for the online, self-administered test. Applicants must answer 15 of the 20 questions correctly.
Meanwhile, most citizenship ceremonies have also gone virtual, with the Conservatives pushing Ottawa to reinstate in-person ceremonies.
In December, Conservative immigration critic Michelle Rempel Garner calledon the Liberals to return to in-person ceremonies, which she called a “sacred event” where new Canadians “swear an out to the country and take on the responsibilities and obligations that come with citizenship.”
During a press conference in Ottawa, Rempel Garner said it was time for the Carney government to “restore the value of Canadian citizenship.”
“Last year, over half of the people who became Canadian citizens did so by clicking a box online. That’s crazy. There is no way to justify this practice, and with support for immigration at an all-time low, returning to inclusive nation-building ceremonies is a no-brainer,” she said at the time. “In person, citizenship ceremonies are the essential unifying bedrock of Canada’s civic life.”
She called for an immediate end to “one-click citizenship” and to “restore the full dignity and communal significance” of the in-person ceremonies for new Canadians.
“Just as with marriage, these are sacred events, and the responsibilities and obligations taken on swearing the Oath of Citizenship in front of an official should be upheld as an integral part of committing to those responsibilities that come along with being Canadian,” Rempel-Garner said. “The Liberals rejected every opportunity to restore in-person ceremonies. Justice Minister Sean Fraser even defended virtual ceremonies, saying the practice could be easier for bureaucrats to manage.”
This comes after the president of the Customs and Immigration Union, which represents the Canada Border Services Agency, revealed to an immigration committee that the majority of asylum claims are being done through an app. He warned Canadians that removing person-to-person interviews could compromise Canada’s security.
Follow the money applies even more strongly to Trump, his family and his enablers:
…And while banks are required to adhere to anti-money-laundering and KYC rules and list where a customer lives, they are not currently required to collect and verify citizenship information.
If Mr. Trump signed such an executive order, it could require banks to retroactively get citizenship information from existing customers and collect it from new customers.
Politics and privacy aside, that task would be Herculean – and expensive. The costs would likely be passed on to customers.
Opponents of such a measure would say that once again, Mr. Trump is overreaching his authority. This has nothing to do with the integrity of the banking system and everything to do with his agenda.
Supporters would be quick to remind detractors that one of Mr. Trump’s top campaign promises was to crack down on illegal immigration. And while not everyone agrees with his tactics, don’t be so naive to think you can do the job by being soft, and this is what the majority of American voters said they wanted.
At the end of the day, it really comes down to the now infamous line from All the President’s Men, the 1976 film about the Watergate scandal.
If you want to shine a light on corruption, “follow the money.” And that, presumably, is what such a measure would be meant to do.
Regular detailed tracking of Canadian immigration including permanent residents, temporary workers, asylum claimants, and study permits from 2018 to 2025 with regional and program-specific insights.
Quarterly and annual comparisons. While Permanent Residents 2025 target met, temporary workers, IMP and TFWP, significantly exceed planned levels, with students also exceeding.
While all programs showed significant increase since 2018 baseline, 2025 also showed a decline compared to 2024. Slides 3 and 4 provide the highlights.
Multicultural Meanderings 