Carney government introduces bill to beef up border security

2025/06/05 1 Comment

Predictable criticism from refugee and immigration advocates who invariably either cannot ackowledge abuses of the system or come up with possible measures to deal with the same, beyond calling for more resources.

One nugget that should improve processing and service for citizenship is:

“Make it easier for IRCC to share client information between different IRCC programs (e.g. using permanent residence application data to process citizenship applications).”

My sense is that the immigration and asylum provisions will likely be supported by the Conservative opposition but there will likely be tensions within the Liberal caucus:

…The bill was immediately met with concerns about privacy, refugee rights and its omnibus aspect.

NDP MP Jenny Kwan said the bill should be “alarming” to Canadians and risks breaching their civil liberties, particularly for its changes on immigration.

“They are trying to create this illusion that Canada’s border is more secure in some way, but however, a lot of the components within the bill targets Canada’s own immigration policies and processes that has nothing to do with the United States,” she said, questioning why there were no measures specifically targeting illegal guns coming from the U.S., for example.

“There are lots of pieces that I think should be concerning to Canadians.”

Anandasangaree, a former human rights lawyer, defended seeking those new powers Tuesday.

“I worked my entire life in the protection of human rights and civil liberties. That’s a marquee part of the work that I’ve done before politics, in politics,” he told reporters.

“In order for me to bring forward legislation, it needed to have the safeguards in place, it needed to be in line with the values of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and I fundamentally believe that we have striked the balance that, while expanding powers in certain instances, does have the safeguards and the protections in place to protect individual freedoms and rights.”

Those safeguards include not allowing information on immigration to be shared with other countries unless permitted by the minister, as well as judicial oversight that would require a warrant except in “exigent” circumstances. 

The proposed legislation, which will require the support of another party to pass in the minority Parliament, is meant to address the surge of asylum-seekers and the ballooning backlogs in refugee applications. Anyone who first arrived Canada after June 24, 2020 would not be allowed to make a refugee claim after one year, regardless of whether they left the country and returned; irregular migrants who enter Canada from the U.S. between land ports of entry would also be denied the rights to asylum.

“They’re coming up with all of these various ways to basically turn the tap off, to actually make it a more restrictive process,” said Queen’s University immigration and refugee law professor Sharry Aiken.

“That will harm vulnerable people and deny some groups of claimants their right to accessing a fair hearing” by the independent Immigration and Refugee Board, Aiken said.

Canada has seen the number of asylum-seekers triple in less than a decade, from 50,365 in 2017 to 171,845 last year. As of April, the refugee tribunal has 284,715 claims awaiting a decision.

More international students, visitors and foreign workers are seeking asylum to prolong their stays in Canada after Ottawa clamped down on the runaway growth of temporary residents and reduced permanent resident admissions amid concerns of the housing and affordability crisis.

The Canadian Council for Refugees said the proposed asylum changes mirror the American approach, where borders are militarized and securitized as refugees and migrants are viewed as a security threat.

“Under international law, there is no time frame on the right to seek protection. Where we do find this precedent is in the U.S.,” said Gauri Sreenivasan, the council’s co-executive director.

Anandasangaree said those who are affected by proposed ineligibility rules for asylum could ask for an assessment by immigration officials to ensure they would not face harm if sent back to their country.

However, critics said that process is less robust than a full hearing by the refugee board, and this would simply pass the administrative burden to the already strained Immigration Department and the Federal Court.

“It could force many people who have no choice because they are under threat in their country or in the U.S. to live underground without status,” Sreenivasan warned.

Source: Carney government introduces bill to beef up border security

And Althia Raj questions who pressed for these changes (likely under development for some time by IRCC officials given the numbers and abuses):

….Those who work with refugees are also alarmed.

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s first piece of legislation pulls away the welcome mat for asylum seekers. It makes it nearly impossible for those who have been in Canada for more than a year, either as students, permanent residents, or temporary workers, and those who’ve snuck into Canada between land border crossings and have been here for more than two weeks, from having their asylum cases heard.

“A lot of people are going to get rejected because they’re not going to have an opportunity to explain for themselves why they would be in danger when they go back (home),” said Adam Sadinsky, an immigration and refugee lawyer with Silcoff Shacter in Toronto.

On Parliament Hill, the NDP’s Jenny Kwan described the law as “violating people’s due process and taking away people’s basic rights,” and also noted that it will drive people underground.

A problem that could be fixed by beefing up the immigration system — staffing and resources — will instead encourage those who are in Canada, and fear being deported to their home country, to stay here illegally. It will make it much more difficult for federal, provincial and municipal authorities to know who is living here, where they are, and what services they need. And it may simply move staffing and resource pressures away from the Immigration and Refugee Board toward the federal court, who will now hear more requests for stays to remain in Canada and for judicial review of unfavourable decisions.

On CBC, Anandasangaree said his “comprehensive bill” was directly linked with what is happening at the Canada-U.S. border, but it also “responds to … the mandate (Canadians) gave us on April the 28th.”

Does it? Are these the values that Canadians voted to uphold?…

Source: Opinion | Border bill primed to give Mark Carney’s government sweeping new powers. Who asked for this?

Filed under Immigration, Multiculturalism, Refugees Tagged with , , , , ,

High immigration is worsening Canada’s economic problems, says [OECD] report

2025/06/05 Leave a comment

Not different to what Skuterud, Worswick and others have been pointing out over the past few years and more:

By overseeing one of the most dramatic immigration surges of modern times, Canada has cratered housing affordability, kneecapped productivity and concealed the true state of its economic growth, according to a new profile by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

The OECD is a club of 38 countries that effectively comprise the developed world. Every two years, each member state receives a comprehensive “economic survey” prepared by OECD economists.

Canada’s most recent survey — published just last week — focuses in particular on the issues of housing affordability and worker productivity, two areas in which Canada now ranks among the worst in the developed world.

And in both instances, the OECD fingers record-high immigration as having made the problems worse.

“Rapid population growth has exacerbated previous housing affordability challenges,” reads the report, adding the blunt recommendation that “housing supply should keep pace with immigration targets.”

Similarly, the OECD warns that Canada has been packing millions of new workers into its labour force without any comparable increase in “productivity-enhancing investment.” With the economy thus remaining relatively stagnant, Canada’s workers are receiving an increasingly small share of the overall economic pie.

On top of this, the report notes that while Canada used to prioritize high-skilled immigrants such as doctors and engineers, its migration flows are now mostly comprised of low-skilled workers.

“The skill composition of recent immigration, which included many students and temporary workers, has also likely reduced average labour productivity,” it reads.

The OECD’s own stats have long shown that Canada is an outlier in the realm of housing affordability. The OECD’s most recent tally of the “price to income” ratio of Canadian housing shows that it is the highest of all their member states save for Portugal.

Over the last 10 years, Canada has also been one of the worst performers in OECD rankings of GDP growth per capita.

From 2014 to 2022, Canada’s rate of per-capita GDP growth was worse than any other OECD country save Luxembourg and Mexico.

Across those nine years, the average Canadian saw their share of overall GDP rise by just 0.6 per cent per year.

Canada’s “GDP per capita growth has lagged in recent years, particularly compared to its close neighbour, the United States,” wrote the OECD.

In the U.S., GDP growth per capita from 2014 to 2022 was nearly three times higher than Canada, at 1.7 per cent.

The report isn’t entirely downcast on Canada’s economic future. In a summary, the authors declare that Canada’s economy is “resilient” and endowed with “robust public finances.”

But the document is one of the first outside sources to detail the unprecedented surge of Canadian migration overseen by Ottawa in the immediate wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Canada’s population grew rapidly, by 3.0 per cent in 2023 and 2.6 per cent in 2024. This is much faster than in other OECD countries such as the United States or countries in Europe,” it reads.

About six times faster, in fact. In 2023, the average OECD country grew by just 0.5 per cent.

This worked out to about one million newcomers entering Canada each year. At the beginning of 2022, the Canadian population stood at about 38.5 million. Now, it’s at 41.6 million, an increase of more than three million.

It’s a surge in voluntary population growth like few in history. Although other OECD members have experienced comparable population surges, at least in the short term, they’re usually the result of war or other displacements.

The report also confirms a phenomenon that Canadian analysts have been warning about since 2023: That Canada has been in a “per capita” recession for several years, with overall GDP only seeming to grow because of rapid population growth.

The injection of three million people has seemed to increase GDP, simply because all the newcomers are paying rent, buying groceries and increasing the amount of money circulating in the economy.

But on an individual basis, the average Canadians’ wealth and purchasing power has only been dropping.

The OECD report highlights this disparity with two duelling charts. On a measure of “real GDP,” Canada is able to keep up with the OECD average perfectly. But when ranked by “real GDP per capita,” Canada’s economic performance suddenly falls dramatically behind.

“GDP growth has been supported by high population growth,” according to a subtitle.

Prime Minister Mark Carney has recently highlighted the issue of diminishing Canadian productivity, saying in a speech last week that it was making “life unaffordable for Canadians.” Carney’s proposed remedy is to reduce internal trade barriers and embark on a series of “nation-building” projects.

The OECD noted that Canada has backed off the peak highs of its immigration intake, writing that the Liberal government “has adjusted and recalibrated its immigration targets … and population growth has since begun to slow.”

Nevertheless, even under these new figures, Canadian immigration is set to be far higher than its pre-COVID levels.

Canada’s 2025 immigration targets are still set to bring in more than one million newcomers this year, mostly in the realm of non-permanent residents. Under the federal government’s latest Immigration Levels Plan, this year will see 395,000 new permanent residents, 305,900 new international students and 367,750 new temporary workers.

Source: FIRST READING: High immigration is worsening Canada’s economic problems, says report

Filed under Immigration Tagged with

The diversity of candidates and MPs stalled for some groups in this election

2025/06/05 Leave a comment

My latest collaboration with Jerome Black on the diversity of candidates and MPs. Stall for women and visible minorities, ongoing increase for visible minorities.

In summary, differences in political-party representation reflect dissimilarities in demographic trends (such as higher growth rates of visible minorities), overall election dynamics, political-party recruitment efforts, and the extent to which groups feel their concerns are reflected in political platforms and messaging.

Source: The diversity of candidates and MPs stalled for some groups in this election

Filed under Aboriginal, gender, Immigration, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Hiebert: Canada’s Future Depends on Where Immigrants Settle, Not Just How Many Are Welcomed

2025/06/04 Leave a comment

 Good analysis by my friend Dan Hiebert noting the needed linkages between immigration and other policies:

Immigration alone cannot solve Canada’s regional and demographic challenges, according to a new report from the C.D. Howe Institute. Immigration must be paired with regional development; otherwise, Canada risks exacerbating the divide between fast- and slow-growth regions while placing even greater strain on already pressured large urban centres.

In “Fast vs. Slow: How Different Immigration Rates Can Impact Canada’s Economic Challenges and Regional Disparities,” Daniel Hiebert finds that regardless of the number of immigrants Canada welcomes, settlement patterns result in only modest population growth in slower-growth regions.

“Regionalization policies like Provincial Nominee Programs have helped newcomers to settle beyond the big three cities,” said Hiebert. “But the real test is whether they stay – secondary migration is pulling people right back into fast-growing areas.”

Hiebert argues that a multi-stage immigration process – such as beginning with temporary status – can help slower-growth regions retain newcomers by giving them time to build social and economic ties before settling permanently.

“If we’re judging the system by how well it supports all parts of the country, it’s coming up short,” Hiebert added. “Immigration can certainly help address Canada’s demographic challenges, but it’s not the only tool – we need broader regional development to make it work.”

The report emphasizes the need for Canada to pair immigration initiatives with broader efforts to strengthen local economic opportunities, access to services, and overall community attractiveness. It also outlines several policy recommendations to help slow-growth regions thrive, including investing in infrastructure, fast-tracking credentials, and supporting the growth of promising mid-sized cities that can absorb growth and ease pressure on major urban centres.

“With housing costs, productivity issues, and an ageing population dominating the national conversation, building growth and resilience across all regions has to be a top priority,” said Hiebert. “It’s not just about the number of newcomers we bring in – it’s about making sure they have the support and opportunities to thrive wherever they settle.”

Read the Full Report

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

Immigration Canada rembourse certains frais quand les temps d’attente excèdent ses normes

2025/06/04 Leave a comment

Welcome change and accountability:

Alors que les délais d’attente de traitement en immigration font de plus en plus la manchette, Immigration, Réfugiés et Citoyenneté Canada (IRCC) dépense de plus en plus d’argent pour rembourser des immigrants après ne pas avoir respecté ses propres normes de service.

Cette mesure encore très peu connue a coûté 1,68 million de dollars au ministère fédéral l’an dernier, considérablement plus que l’année précédente, lors de laquelle seulement 72 000 $ avaient été déboursés. Cette politique, qui découle de la Loi sur les frais de service, n’est en vigueur que depuis 2021, et certains des services d’IRCC ne se sont ajoutés à la liste qu’en 2023. Les données pour 2024-2025 seront disponibles l’automne prochain, a indiqué un relationniste au Devoir.

Le remboursement est « automatique », c’est-à-dire que la personne qui a déposé un dossier n’a pas à le demander. « Toutefois, la délivrance peut prendre un certain temps », souvent « entre 2 à 8 semaines », indiquent plusieurs pages d’IRCC. La remise de frais déjà engagés n’est pas non plus à hauteur de 100 % : selon le nombre de jours excédant le délai affiché, ce sont 25 ou 50 % des frais qui sont renvoyés à l’expéditeur. Il s’agit donc, pour la plupart des bénéficiaires, de quelques dizaines ou centaines de dollars tout au plus.

« C’est du jamais vu en 15 ans de carrière », a commenté, surpris, l’avocat en immigration Maxime Lapointe. L’un de ses clients a récemment été avisé par courriel que le montant qu’il a payé à IRCC serait remboursé à 50 %. « Dans le contexte économique actuel, rembourser une partie des frais de traitement est contre-intuitif, car le travail des fonctionnaires est fait quand même », note-t-il.

Surtout, le « client » qui a entamé ces démarches « sort aussi échaudé de son expérience avec IRCC », poursuit Me Lapointe.

Ce ministère fédéral est souvent critiqué, notamment en raison de l’impossibilité de parler à un agent ou à la suite de refus sans demande de document supplémentaire.

Ces remboursements sont en fait si peu connus que deux associations qui représentent des immigrants ont confié au Devoir ne pas être au courant, et donc ne pas pouvoir commenter.

Source: Immigration Canada rembourse certains frais quand les temps d’attente excèdent ses normes

As immigration processing waits are making headlines, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) is spending more and more money to reimburse immigrants after not meeting its own standards of service.

This measure, which is still very little known, cost the federal prosecutor’s office $1.68 million last year, considerably more than the previous year, when only $72,000 was disbursed. This policy, which stems from the Service Fees Act, has only been in effect since 2021, and some of the IRCC services were not added to the list until 2023. Data for 2024-2025 will be available next fall, a relations officer told Le Devoir.

The refund is “automatic”, i.e. the person who filed a file does not have to request it. “However, the delivery can take a certain time”, often “between 2 and 8 weeks”, indicate several pages of IRCC. The remission of expenses already incurred is also not up to 100%: depending on the number of days exceeding the posted deadline, 25 or 50% of the costs are returned to the sender. It is therefore, for most beneficiaries, a few tens or hundreds of dollars at most.

“This is unprecedented in 15 years of career,” commented immigration lawyer Maxime Lapointe, surprised. One of his clients was recently notified by email that the amount he paid to IRCC would be refunded at 50%. “In the current economic context, reimbursing part of the processing costs is counterintuitive, because the work of civil servants is done anyway,” he notes.

Above all, the “client” who started these procedures “also comes out scalded from his experience with IRCC,” continues Me Lapointe.

This federal ministry is often criticized, in particular because of the impossibility of speaking to an officer or as a result of refusal without requesting additional documentation.

These refunds are in fact so little known that two associations representing immigrants have told the Devoir that they are not aware, and therefore cannot comment.

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Peter Csillag: Is ending the Temporary Foreign Worker Program a good idea? 

2025/06/03 Leave a comment

More reasonable assessment and approach than that of MP Jivani’s call to abolish the program complemely save for agriculture workers. And good question for policymakers and politicians to ponder and influence policy changes:

…A question for government policymakers would be how to incentivize the private sector to make large-scale training investments for underemployed Canadians, and just as importantly, how to make in-demand professions appealing for young adults and underemployed Canadians? There’s no single answer given that needs would vary across regions and sectors.

There are international examples that serve as a useful start. Germany has a dual education system integrating school-based learning with work-based practice. Approximately 52 percent of young Germans complete dual vocational education and training apprenticeships, and in many instances, they are offered long-term positions at the same companies where they trained. It maintains the country’s status as an industrial powerhouse while proactively addressing youth unemployment. Adopting such an approach would mean a longer timeline to wind down the TFW program, transitioning employers only gradually away from the program to minimize economic disruption.

For regional priority sectors, the answer may be a provincial role. Last year, the Government of Alberta launched a program specifically to transition temporary foreign workers in the tourism and hospitality industry to permanent residency. To support the province’s ambitious tourism growth agenda, the program allows qualified candidates, foreign workers already living and working in Alberta with a job offer from an Alberta tourism and hospitality employer, to apply under the provincially nominated immigration stream.

The unique challenges facing different regions and sectors mean that ending the TFW program cannot be done overnight, and not without a clear path for training workers and addressing regional economic challenges. But after decades of the program swinging between a “more and faster” and “Canadians first” pendulum, only to be left with the same structural problems and displaced Canadian workers, the time to have this discussion is now.

Source: Peter Csillag: Is ending the Temporary Foreign Worker Program a good idea?

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

MPI: Seeking to Ramp Up Deportations, the Trump Administration Quietly Expands a Vast Web of Data

2025/06/03 Leave a comment

The surveillance state in action:

To help accomplish its aim of mass deportations, the Trump administration is tapping into numerous federal, state, and local databases at an unprecedented scale, and making more of them interoperable. The reach into and communication between information storehouses—including ones containing sensitive information about all U.S. residents’ taxes, health, benefits receipt, and addresses—allows U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other authorities to harvest, exchange, and share a vast trove of data. The aim of tapping government and commercial databases appears twofold: attempt to secure large-scale arrests and deportations of removable noncitizens, and instill a sense of fear so that others “self deport.”

The Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), launched by Elon Musk, has played an oversized role in this data-leveraging mission, accessing sensitive databases across government agencies and breaking down long-standing silos erected for operational and privacy reasons. And the software company Palantir, a longtime ICE contractor, has been awarded a new contract initially for $30 million to build a “streamlined” database to aid immigration enforcement.

Palantir’s Immigration Lifecycle Operating System (ImmigrationOS) will add to an already formidable arsenal of data available to ICE, including from the private sector. The agency is believed to be among the largest government purchasers of commercial credit, utility, motor vehicle agency, and other information—including airline passenger data, according to recent reporting. By one estimate, in 2022 ICE was able to know the addresses of three out of four U.S. adults—citizen and noncitizen alike.

ICE was established as part of the U.S. counterterrorism and homeland security machinery that was expanded in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. While the post-9/11 enterprise was aimed at foreign terrorists, today’s principal enforcement mission across a range of government agencies is to assist the Trump administration’s quest to carry out 1 million deportations annually.

The government’s tapping into databases with sensitive personal information—including databases never before used for large-scale immigration enforcement, such as voter information—has raised alarm among civil libertarians and security experts, who fear the potential for privacy violations for all U.S. residents and possible exploitation by nefarious actors.

This article looks at the recent efforts to expand ICE’s domestic surveillance and arrest capabilities by giving it access to new databases to build a vast, interoperable data network that can be used for immigration enforcement purposes, with the possibility of future implications for U.S. citizens. It places the current moves within a 25-year legacy of information-sharing initiatives in the immigration realm…

Source: Seeking to Ramp Up Deportations, the Trump Administration Quietly Expands a Vast Web of Data

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , , ,

Shang: America’s talented foreign students could find a home in Canada 

2025/06/03 2 Comments

No to tuition-fee discounts, however. Scholarships for the most talented yes. And the scaling back focus is mainly on the college sector, not on the university graduate students that we should aim to attract.

…Canadian policymakers and university administrators need to act boldly, and they need to act now. Outreach will be critical. This is the time to actively promote our universities as not just reputable, but reliable: institutions where academic freedom is protected, immigration pathways are stable, and world-class education leads to long-term opportunity. 

Strategic outreach to high school and university graduates must go beyond general recruitment. Instead, it should signal with clarity and ambition that Canada is ready to welcome the talent that once defaulted to America. Administratively, universities should simplify credit transfer systems for students wishing to shift mid-degree from the U.S. to Canada. Financially, there can be partial scholarships or tuition-fee discounts for U.S.-based international students affected by policy changes. This requires a rethink of our immigration policies, given that Canada has been scaling back student visas. The federal government, the provinces and university administrators should work together to fast-track visas for talented students. 

Recruiting efforts should not only be limited to students. Many world-renowned researchers and professors are becoming increasingly disillusioned with the instability and politicization of academia in America, and some have already chosen to move to Canadian institutions. Canadian universities can create new and accelerated tenure-track positions and lab relocation grants for such researchers.

An influx of world-class international students and academics would not only strengthen our research institutions but also bolster long-term innovation, entrepreneurship, and workforce competitiveness. Their integration into Canadian society contributes to demographic renewal, economic growth, and the global standing of our universities.

Source: America’s talented foreign students could find a home in Canada

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Trump’s $5 million Gold Card offers the rich a fast lane to residency

2025/06/03 Leave a comment

Good assessment of this harebrained scheme, unlikely to attract the worthy. Lack of details on how it would work also cause for concern. Silver’s comment at the end sounds about right:

Lawyers’ phones are ringing with wealthy foreigners wanting to know more about how to score a “Gold Card” – a glorified green card that would allow them to live and work in the U.S. without going through the usual hassle or red tape. Apparently, the card’s $5 million price tag is not scaring off the jet-setters looking to make the U.S. home. Or at least one of their homes.

“$5 million to these people is jet fuel cost. It means nothing to them,” says Matthew Kolken, an immigration lawyer from Buffalo, NY, who has Canadian clients asking about the Gold Card. The clients declined to comment, but Kolken says he thinks the Gold Card is underpriced, if anything, considering the time and hassle it would save foreign multi-millionaires.

“It allows them to potentially buy their way into the United States,” says Kolken. “They would just be able to throw down their Amex Black Card.”

And plenty are interested.

“I have one from India, one from Pakistan, and two from Egypt. And a colleague who has a few [clients] from Russia,” says immigration attorney Mona Shah. Most are drawn to the offer of an express lane to permanent residency, plus more favorable tax implications; foreign nationals living in the U.S. on a Gold Card would only be taxed on their U.S. earnings.

Shah says the security — and the status — of being able to flash that “Gold Card” to get waved into the U. S. is also a big draw, as well as what Trump has described as “privileges – plus.” The president hasn’t elaborated on what that means, but Shah says clients are imagining VIP perks that range from easy loans to a special fast-track lane through Customs at U.S. airports.

“They seem to believe that this is going to be some kind of separating first class from economy class, and that this is some kind of ‘red carpet’ visa and they will be treated like a VIP everywhere,” says Shah.

But whether any such perks – or obligations – will come with the Gold Card remains far from clear, and the administration is not offering any more details some three months after President Donald Trump first started hyping the idea.

“It’s a great thing, the Gold Card. Remember the words ‘the Gold Card!'” he proclaimed to reporters in the Oval Office in February. “Wealthy people will be coming into our country by buying this card. They’ll be wealthy and they’ll be successful and they’ll be spending a lot of money and paying a lot of taxes and employing a lot of people. And we think it’s going to be extremely successful, never been done before anything like this.”

Trump added that he’d be happy to call it the “Trump Gold Card.” In fact officials say a government website is now using the name TrumpCard.gov, and Trump has since revealed a sample card with a picture of his face on the front.

Trump has said the proceeds of the Gold Card would go to help pay down the budget deficit, and possibly even chip away at the massive $36.2 trillion national debt.

“We’ll be able to sell maybe a million of these cards, maybe more than that,” Trump said. “A million cards would be worth $5 trillion. And if you sell 10 million of the cards, that’s a total of $50 trillion. We have $35 trillion in debt. That’d be nice.”

But most immigration experts and attorneys see that figure as wildly unrealistic. They expect sales to be in the low thousands.

Immigration lawyer Darren Silver says he’s received a flurry of calls about the Gold Card, but interest wanes as soon as he explains this program is not like the existing EB-5 visa program, which requires an investment of something closer to $1 million in a business that creates jobs or $800,000 for investments in a lower-income ‘targeted employment area.’

Silver says his clients are surprised when he tells them the Gold Card is not an investment that might offer any returns. It’s effectively just a donation.

“I had to explain to them, ‘you’re gifting the U.S. government $5 million. That’s all you’re doing.'” says Silver. “And once I explain that to them, they’re out.”

Source: Trump’s $5 million Gold Card offers the rich a fast lane to residency

Filed under Immigration, Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , ,

Snubbing Trump, Immigration Nominee Would End Student Practical Training

2025/06/02 Leave a comment

Similar to PGWP in Canada. Our daughter benefited from OPT following her graduation:

Even though President Donald Trump has said international students should receive green cards after graduating from U.S. universities, a nominee to head the nation’s immigration service says he wants to stop foreign students from working after graduation.

Joseph Edlow, the president’s nominee for director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, said he would do this by ending Optional Practical Training. Economists, business leaders and educators have said that ending post-graduation OPT and STEM OPT would halt America’s best programs for attracting and retaining international talent.

Immigration Nominee Offers Negative Views On International Students Working In America

During a confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, Edlow made statements certain to alarm universities, technology companies and international students.

“I think the way in which OPT has been handled over the past four years, with the help of certain decisions coming out of the D.C. Circuit Court, have been a real problem in terms of misapplication of the law,” Edlow said in response. “What I want to see would be essentially a regulatory and sub-regulatory program that would allow us to remove the ability for employment authorizations for F-1 students beyond the time that they are in school.” (Emphasis added. The exchange occurs at about 1 hr., 45 min of the linked video.)

According to the Institute of International Education, in the 2023/24 academic year, 163,452 international students engaged in post-completion OPT and 79,330 were in STEM OPT — a total of 242,782. Limiting employment authorization for OPT or STEM OPT to when students carry their full course load would cause these numbers to plummet and significantly reduce the number of international students who gain H-1B status, including by eliminating STEM OPT, which follows the completion of OPT.

The Immigration Regulatory Threats To OPT And STEM OPT

Optional Practical Training allows international students to work for 12 months in their major course of study before or after completing their course requirements. STEM OPT allows students to gain practical experience through working an additional 24 months (beyond OPT) in a science, technology, engineering or math field.

Educators consider OPT and STEM OPT essential because practical training benefits students’ education and encourages them to enroll in U.S. universities. The additional 24 months in STEM OPT also allows employers a much better opportunity to secure an H-1B petition for students. Business trade associations participated in the D.C. Circuit case on STEM OPT as intervenors due to their interests in the litigation’s outcome, as did approximately 150 colleges, universities and related organizations.

Source: Snubbing Trump, Immigration Nominee Would End Student Practical Training

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →