Trump Executive Orders of Interest

Many of these will be subject to litigation. Similarly to the Harper government’s titles of legislation, the titles have political rather than more neutral language. A selection of the one’s I will be watching in particular and expect considerable commentary and likely legal challenges:

Citizenship

PROTECTING THE MEANING AND VALUE OF AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP [ACLU and others already submitted a legal challenge, and it appears to be framed more broadly than just women not in the USA legally as it includes temporary residents such as international students and workers. Indian media has particularly flagged impact on H1-B and other visa holders.]

Section 1.  Purpose.  The privilege of United States citizenship is a priceless and profound gift.  The Fourteenth Amendment states:  “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”  That provision rightly repudiated the Supreme Court of the United States’s shameful decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), which misinterpreted the Constitution as permanently excluding people of African descent from eligibility for United States citizenship solely based on their race. 

But the Fourteenth Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States.  The Fourteenth Amendment has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”  Consistent with this understanding, the Congress has further specified through legislation that “a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is a national and citizen of the United States at birth, 8 U.S.C. 1401, generally mirroring the Fourteenth Amendment’s text.  

Among the categories of individuals born in the United States and not subject to the jurisdiction thereof, the privilege of United States citizenship does not automatically extend to persons born in the United States:  (1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States at the time of said person’s birth was lawful but temporary (such as, but not limited to, visiting the United States under the auspices of the Visa Waiver Program or visiting on a student, work, or tourist visa) and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.

Sec. 2.  Policy.  (a)  It is the policy of the United States that no department or agency of the United States government shall issue documents recognizing United States citizenship, or accept documents issued by State, local, or other governments or authorities purporting to recognize United States citizenship, to persons:  (1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States was lawful but temporary, and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.

Immigration

PROTECTING THE UNITED STATES FROM FOREIGN TERRORISTS AND OTHER NATIONAL SECURITY AND PUBLIC SAFETY THREATS

Section 1.  Policy and Purpose.  (a)  It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from aliens who intend to commit terrorist attacks, threaten our national security, espouse hateful ideology, or otherwise exploit the immigration laws for malevolent purposes.

(b)  To protect Americans, the United States must be vigilant during the visa-issuance process to ensure that those aliens approved for admission into the United States do not intend to harm Americans or our national interests.  More importantly, the United States must identify them before their admission or entry into the United States.  And the United States must ensure that admitted aliens and aliens otherwise already present in the United States do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles, and do not advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists and other threats to our national security.

PROTECTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AGAINST INVASION

Section 1.  Purpose.  Over the last 4 years, the prior administration invited, administered, and oversaw an unprecedented flood of illegal immigration into the United States.  Millions of illegal aliens crossed our borders or were permitted to fly directly into the United States on commercial flights and allowed to settle in American communities, in violation of longstanding Federal laws.

Many of these aliens unlawfully within the United States present significant threats to national security and public safety, committing vile and heinous acts against innocent Americans.  Others are engaged in hostile activities, including espionage, economic espionage, and preparations for terror-related activities.  Many have abused the generosity of the American people, and their presence in the United States has cost taxpayers billions of dollars at the Federal, State, and local levels.

Enforcing our Nation’s immigration laws is critically important to the national security and public safety of the United States.  The American people deserve a Federal Government that puts their interests first and a Government that understands its sacred obligation to prioritize the safety, security, and financial and economic well-being of Americans.

This order ensures that the Federal Government protects the American people by faithfully executing the immigration laws of the United States.

SECURING OUR BORDERS

Section 1.  Purpose.  Over the last 4 years, the United States has endured a large-scale invasion at an unprecedented level.  Millions of illegal aliens from nations and regions all around the world successfully entered the United States where they are now residing, including potential terrorists, foreign spies, members of cartels, gangs, and violent transnational criminal organizations, and other hostile actors with malicious intent.

Deadly narcotics and other illicit materials have flowed across the border while agents and officers spend their limited resources processing illegal aliens for release into the United States.  These catch-and-release policies undermine the rule of law and our sovereignty, create substantial risks to public safety and security, and divert critical resources away from stopping the entry of contraband and fugitives into the United States.  

We have limited information on the precise whereabouts of a great number of these illegal aliens who have entered the United States over the last 4 years.

This cannot stand.  A nation without borders is not a nation, and the Federal Government must act with urgency and strength to end the threats posed by an unsecured border.

REALIGNING THE UNITED STATES REFUGEE ADMISSIONS PROGRAM

Section 1.  Purpose.  Over the last 4 years, the United States has been inundated with record levels of migration, including through the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP).  Cities and small towns alike, from Charleroi, Pennsylvania, and Springfield, Ohio, to Whitewater, Wisconsin, have seen significant influxes of migrants.  Even major urban centers such as New York City, Chicago, and Denver have sought Federal aid to manage the burden of new arrivals.  Some jurisdictions, like New York and Massachusetts, have even recently declared states of emergency because of increased migration.

The United States lacks the ability to absorb large numbers of migrants, and in particular, refugees, into its communities in a manner that does not compromise the availability of resources for Americans, that protects their safety and security, and that ensures the appropriate assimilation of refugees.  This order suspends the USRAP until such time as the further entry into the United States of refugees aligns with the interests of the United States.

CLARIFYING THE MILITARY’S ROLE IN PROTECTING THE TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY OF THE UNITED STATES

Section 1.  Purpose.  (a)  As Chief Executive and as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, I have no more solemn responsibility than protecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the United States along our national borders.  The protection of a nation’s territorial integrity and national boundaries is paramount for its security.

(b)  The Armed Forces of the United States have played a long and well-established role in securing our borders against threats of invasion, against unlawful forays by foreign nationals into the United States, and against other transnational criminal activities that violate our laws and threaten the peace, harmony, and tranquility of the Nation.  These threats have taken a variety of forms over our Nation’s history, but the Armed Forces have consistently played an integral role in protecting the sovereignty of the United States.

(c)  Threats against our Nation’s sovereignty continue today, and it is essential that the Armed Forces staunchly continue to participate in the defense of our territorial integrity and sovereignty.  A National Emergency currently exists along the southern border of the United States.  Unchecked unlawful mass migration and the unimpeded flow of opiates across our borders continue to endanger the safety and security of the American people and encourage further lawlessness.  Accordingly, through this order, I am acting in accordance with my solemn duty to protect and defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the United States along our national borders.

DEI

ENDING RADICAL AND WASTEFUL GOVERNMENT DEI PROGRAMS AND PREFERENCING

Section 1.  Purpose and Policy.  The Biden Administration forced illegal and immoral discrimination programs, going by the name “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI), into virtually all aspects of the Federal Government, in areas ranging from airline safety to the military.  This was a concerted effort stemming from President Biden’s first day in office, when he issued Executive Order 13985, “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.”

Pursuant to Executive Order 13985 and follow-on orders, nearly every Federal agency and entity submitted “Equity Action Plans” to detail the ways that they have furthered DEIs infiltration of the Federal Government.  The public release of these plans demonstrated immense public waste and shameful discrimination.  That ends today.  Americans deserve a government committed to serving every person with equal dignity and respect, and to expending precious taxpayer resources only on making America great.

DEFENDING WOMEN FROM GENDER IDEOLOGY EXTREMISM AND RESTORING BIOLOGICAL TRUTH TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

Section 1.  Purpose.  Across the country, ideologues who deny the biological reality of sex have increasingly used legal and other socially coercive means to permit men to self-identify as women and gain access to intimate single-sex spaces and activities designed for women, from women’s domestic abuse shelters to women’s workplace showers.  This is wrong.  Efforts to eradicate the biological reality of sex fundamentally attack women by depriving them of their dignity, safety, and well-being.  The erasure of sex in language and policy has a corrosive impact not just on women but on the validity of the entire American system.  Basing Federal policy on truth is critical to scientific inquiry, public safety, morale, and trust in government itself.

This unhealthy road is paved by an ongoing and purposeful attack against the ordinary and longstanding use and understanding of biological and scientific terms, replacing the immutable biological reality of sex with an internal, fluid, and subjective sense of self unmoored from biological facts.  Invalidating the true and biological category of “woman” improperly transforms laws and policies designed to protect sex-based opportunities into laws and policies that undermine them, replacing longstanding, cherished legal rights and values with an identity-based, inchoate social concept.

Accordingly, my Administration will defend women’s rights and protect freedom of conscience by using clear and accurate language and policies that recognize women are biologically female, and men are biologically male. 

Government

RESTORING ACCOUNTABILITY FOR CAREER SENIOR EXECUTIVES

Career Senior Executive Service (SES) officials are charged to “ensure that the executive management of the Government of the United States is responsive to the needs, policies, and goals of the Nation and otherwise is of the highest quality,” as required by section 3131 of title 5, United States Code.  SES officials have enormous influence over the functioning of the Federal Government, and thus the well-being of hundreds of millions of Americans.  

As the Constitution makes clear, and as the Supreme Court of the United States has reaffirmed, “the ‘executive Power’ — all of it — is ‘vested in a President,’ who must ‘take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.’”  Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 591 U.S. 197, 203 (2020).  “Because no single person could fulfill that responsibility alone, the Framers expected that the President would rely on subordinate officers for assistance.”  Id. at 203–04.  

The President’s power to remove subordinates is a core part of the Executive power vested by Article II of the Constitution and is necessary for the President to perform his duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”  Because SES officials wield significant governmental authority, they must serve at the pleasure of the President. 

Only that chain of responsibility ensures that SES officials are properly accountable to the President and the American people.  If career SES officials fail to faithfully fulfill their duties to advance the needs, policies, and goals of the United States, the President must be able to rectify the situation and ensure that the entire Executive Branch faithfully executes the law.  For instance, SES officials who engage in unauthorized disclosure of Executive Branch deliberations, violate the constitutional rights of Americans, refuse to implement policy priorities, or perform their duties inefficiently or negligently should be held accountable. 

RESTORING ACCOUNTABILITY TO POLICY-INFLUENCING
POSITIONS WITHIN THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE

Section 1.  Purpose.  Article II of the United States Constitution vests the President with the sole and exclusive authority over the executive branch, including the authority to manage the Federal workforce to ensure effective execution of Federal law.  A critical aspect of this executive function is the responsibility to maintain professionalism and accountability within the civil service.  This accountability is sorely lacking today.  Only 41 percent of civil service supervisors are confident that they can remove an employee who engaged in insubordination or serious misconduct.  Even fewer supervisors –- 26 percent — are confident that they can remove an employee for poor performance.

Accountability is essential for all Federal employees, but it is especially important for those who are in policy-influencing positions.  These personnel are entrusted to shape and implement actions that have a significant impact on all Americans.  Any power they have is delegated by the President, and they must be accountable to the President, who is the only member of the executive branch, other than the Vice President, elected and directly accountable to the American people.  In recent years, however, there have been numerous and well-documented cases of career Federal employees resisting and undermining the policies and directives of their executive leadership.  Principles of good administration, therefore, necessitate action to restore accountability to the career civil service, beginning with positions of a confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating character.

RESTORING FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ENDING FEDERAL CENSORSHIP

Section 1.  Purpose.  The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, an amendment essential to the success of our Republic, enshrines the right of the American people to speak freely in the public square without Government interference.  Over the last 4 years, the previous administration trampled free speech rights by censoring Americans’ speech on online platforms, often by exerting substantial coercive pressure on third parties, such as social media companies, to moderate, deplatform, or otherwise suppress speech that the Federal Government did not approve.  Under the guise of combatting “misinformation,” “disinformation,” and “malinformation,” the Federal Government infringed on the constitutionally protected speech rights of American citizens across the United States in a manner that advanced the Government’s preferred narrative about significant matters of public debate.  Government censorship of speech is intolerable in a free society.

Source: https://www.whitehouse.gov/news/

Ahead of Day 1, Trump’s Team Works to Temper Expectations on Immigration

Reality. But still expect degree of “shock and awe.” Risks disappointing base and perhaps reducing some anxiety given contrast between rhetoric and action:

President-elect Donald J. Trump vowed throughout his campaign to carry out the “largest deportation program in American history,” including a “Day 1” effort to send millions of immigrants “back home where they belong,” and putting “no price tag” on the effort.

But as he transitions from the campaign to the White House, Mr. Trump’s team is encountering a harsh reality of immigration policy: Easier said than done.

In public remarks and private conversations with members of Congress, Mr. Trump’s immigration team has conceded that his aspirations for mass deportations will be both costly and time-consuming.

Stephen Miller, the architect of Mr. Trump’s immigration agenda and his pick to be deputy chief of staff, met with congressional Republicans on Wednesday for a “level setting” of expectations and needs for immigration enforcement, according to a congressional member who participated in the meeting.

Tom Homan, Mr. Trump’s pick to oversee the deportations, has told Republicans to expect a phased approach that first prioritizes those with a criminal record, rather than a national sweep of any immigrant with uncertain or contested legal status. And he has made clear there is, indeed, a price tag for the efforts, saying they will need Congress to approve billions of additional dollars to carry them out.

That is a tall order on Capitol Hill, where Republicans hold slim majorities and Democrats are all but certain to oppose the funding of a mass deportation effort. Some lawmakers expect that after an initial wave of deportations of those easiest to remove, Mr. Trump will spend the rest of his time in office haggling with Congress over money for more.

“Congress needs to fund this deportation operation,” Mr. Homan told Fox Business in December. “It’s going to be expensive, and everybody is focused on how expensive it’s gonna be.”

Mr. Trump will still find ways to call attention to his early efforts to crack down, such as spotlighting deportations in Democratic-led cities or work site raids in the first days of his presidency. While appearing on Donald Trump Jr.’s podcast in November, Mr. Homan said the public should expect immigration action that creates “shock and awe.”…

Source: Ahead of Day 1, Trump’s Team Works to Temper Expectations on Immigration

As border anxiety mounts, ads for smugglers in Canada helping migrants illegally cross into U.S. flourish on social media

Inevitable:

…“Canada to USA. Safe Reach,” the Facebook post says. “No police. Low price. Payment after reach.”

“Canada to USA. Safe Game. Cheapest in Market. 100-per-cent guarantee,” reads a post on Instagram.

Smugglers offering to help people cross the border illegally into the United States are openly advertising their services on social media. The Globe and Mail has found multiple posts from people smugglers who are promoting “safe” routes to the United States, including from Montreal and British Columbia, with some claiming there will be no police involvement or checkpoints.

Some advertisements call their work “dunki” or “donkey” services, with payment due upon arrival. The price, which is not always stated, is in one case listed as $3,500 for same-day service from Canada to the U.S., with “payment after reach.”

Other ads also tout smuggling services over the U.S.’s southern border, as well as to and from other countries….

Source: As border anxiety mounts, ads for smugglers in Canada helping migrants illegally cross into U.S. flourish on social media

The U.S. and Canada quietly agreed to share personal data on permanent residents crossing the border

Understandable given some recent examples of security risks. Dated pre pre-Trump. But government should have been more transparent:

Top immigration lawyers say it’s “shocking” that the federal government quietly signed a new deal with the U.S. government that automatically trades troves of personal data of millions of permanent residents in either country when they try to cross the U.S.-Canada border.

In July, the U.S. and Canadian government quietly made a major change to a 2012 agreement that authorized the automatic sharing of personal information between both countries of non-residents who applied for visas.

The original deal deliberately excluded permanent residents and citizens of both countries from the information sharing regime. But an updated agreement quietly tabled in Parliament in October added permanent residents to the list of individuals whose personal information would automatically be sent to either government if they tried to cross the U.S.-Canada border.

The updated agreement, which was signed in July but came into force this month, impacts potentially millions of permanent residents in Canada and even more in the U.S. if they decide to apply for a visa to visit either country.

In a statement, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) spokesperson Jeffrey MacDonald said that information sharing between the U.S. and Canada “strengthens visitor screening and supports managed migration.”

“The Government of Canada will be authorized to use biographic or biometric information of U.S. permanent residents (PR) making an immigration application to Canada to query and obtain information concerning their immigration history with the U.S,” MacDonald wrote.

“Likewise, the U.S. will be authorized to use biographic or biometric information of Canadian PRs making an immigration application to the U.S. to query and obtain information concerning their immigration history with Canada,” he added.

According to a government website, the information being shared ranges from a visa applicant’s personal information, picture, fingerprint and immigration history.

In an interview, immigration lawyer Mario Bellissimo said that automatically sending the U.S. government data about Canadian permanent residents wanting to cross the southern border is akin to a “devaluation” of permanent resident status.

“On what basis did the government determine that permanent residence needed to be surveilled in this way?,” wondered the chair of the Canadian Bar Association’ national immigration law section.

But the changes were kept quiet by the Canadian government until a brief mention by Immigration Minister Marc Miller during a press conference Wednesday, raising significant concerns among immigration lawyers as to why the major change was kept quiet for so long.

Source: The U.S. and Canada quietly agreed to share personal data on permanent residents crossing the border

Banergee: International university grads speak about aspirations and barriers

Good qualitative research, setting the stage for access to settlement services and other supports (but relatively silent on priorities, trade-offs and numbers:

…Privileges and precarity

Some interviewees arrived in Canada with financial resources and family support, allowing them to manage the high costs of education and living expenses. Others, however, took on substantial debt to finance their studies, reflecting their willingness to invest in future opportunities despite economic risk. While privilege granted access to education, and the potential for permanent residency status, their success was often constrained by precarity, including financial instability, cultural adjustment challenges, legal uncertainties and discrimination.

While students’ advantages can foster success, barriers — including unpredictable immigration systems, lack of professional networks, limited opportunities to gain relevant Canadian work experience and discriminatory treatment — often undermine them. Recognizing this tension is essential to understanding the varied experiences of international students in Canada.

Collaboration needed

Solving these challenges requires collaboration across education, immigration and employment systems. Universities must provide better support, such as work-integrated learning opportunities that connect education to careers. Immigration policies must become more transparent and predictable. Employers need to recognize their role in addressing hiring barriers and creating pathways for international graduates to gain meaningful work experience. 

Finally, appropriate settlement services are key to helping international students build long-term futures in Canada. Many of our interviewees started their journeys excited to study, settle and eventually become part of Canadian society. 

But along the way, barriers like precarious work, limited career options and immigration challenges often left them disillusioned, even after getting permanent residency. With the right supports, these graduates could navigate those hurdles more easily and stay engaged in their goals — finding meaningful work, putting down roots and contributing to their communities for the long term.

This is a pivotal moment to rethink how Canada views and supports international students. Without adequate policies and services to support their long-term success, many are at risk of leaving Canada, taking their skills, education and potential economic contributions elsewhere. 

Ensuring that these graduates feel valued and supported is essential for retaining talent and strengthening Canada’s competitive position in the global race for skilled workers.

Source: International university grads speak about aspirations and barriers

Nearly 50,000 ‘no-show’ international students didn’t comply with their Canadian study permits last year, data show

Countries with highest no show rates (over 10 percent, ranked highest no show rates to lowest: Rwanda, DRC, Ghana, Jordan, Algeria, Cameroon, Iran, Turkey and Nigeria. Suggests that some of accusations of racism regarding African applicants were unfounded given higher no shows and thus entering Canada on false pretences:

Close to 50,000 international students who received study permits to come to Canada were reported as “no-shows” at the colleges and universities where they were supposed to be taking their courses, according to government figures for two months last spring.

Numbers obtained by The Globe and Mail show that the non-compliant students made up 6.9 per cent of the total number of international students recorded by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada.

Universities and colleges are required by the immigration department to report twice a year on whether international students are enrolled and going to class in compliance with their study permits.

The International Student Compliance Regime, implemented in 2014, was designed to help spot bogus students and assist provinces in identifying questionable schools….

In March and April of 2024, colleges and universities reported to IRCC on students from 144 countries. The top 10 countries of student origin with the greatest number of “no-shows” that spring had widely ranging non-compliance rates.

They included 2.2 per cent for Philippines (representing 688 no-show students); 6.4 per cent for China (4,279 no-shows); 11.6 per cent for Iran (1,848 no-shows); and 48.1 per cent for Rwanda (802 no-shows).

Henry Lotin, a former federal economist and expert on immigration, said one way to dampen abuse of the system would be to require international students to pay fees upfront before coming to Canada….

Source: Nearly 50,000 ‘no-show’ international students didn’t comply with their Canadian study permits last year, data show

Su | From sunny ways to stormy days: navigating Canada’s immigration debate

Interesting convergence in position between Su, from York University, and Poilievre, the former stating “…policies should be developed in accordance with Canada’s housing, health care and education capacities and potential,” the latter stating he would “tie the country’s population growth rate to a level that’s below the number of new homes built, and would also consider such factors as access to health-care and jobs:”

….As Canada prepares for new leadership, there is an opportunity to foster a more nuanced and productive dialogue on immigration. We can have hard and honest conversations about immigration without the racism, the hate and the punching down.

Political candidates should develop clear and consistent long-term immigration policies that balance economic needs with social cohesion. These policies should be developed in accordance with Canada’s housing, health care and education capacities and potential. Candidates should also commit to promoting the positive impacts of diversity and multiculturalism on Canadian society and economy to improve social cohesion.

By confronting our immigration identity crisis head-on, political leaders can help shape a more inclusive and prosperous future for all Canadians that stay true to our core values. Immigration has built Canada, so let’s move beyond divisive politics and work toward a unified vision that embraces Canada’s multicultural heritage while addressing the legitimate concerns of voters.

Source: Opinion | From sunny ways to stormy days: navigating Canada’s immigration debate


Family work permits no longer available for some foreign students and workers starting next week

Further curbs:

Starting next week, the federal government will impose further restrictions on access to open work permits for families of international students and temporary foreign workers.

Following an announcement last fall of reductions in the number of temporary residents in Canada, Ottawa released further details Tuesday on changing the eligibility for family members of study and work permit holders to get authorization to work legally in Canada.

Effective Jan. 21, only spouses of the following international students and foreign workers will be able to apply for the family open work permits:

•Students enrolled in master’s programs that are 16 months or longer and in doctoral programs or undergraduate programs in select professions such as medicine, laws and nursing;

•Foreign workers classified as in high-skill, high-wage managerial positions or occupations generally requiring a university degree;

•Foreign workers in the lower-wage, lower-skilled spectrum in so-called TEER 2 or 3 occupations with labour shortages or in natural and applied sciences, construction, health care, natural resources, education, sports and military sectors.

In addition, the foreign worker must also have at least 16 months remaining on their work permit at the time when their spouse applies for the family work permits. Dependent children of foreign workers will no longer be eligible for this work permit.

Source: Family work permits no longer available for some foreign students and workers starting next week

En un an, le Canada a accueilli 550 réfugiés palestiniens

To note:

Un programme fédéral de regroupement familial prévoit depuis le 9 janvier 2024 d’offrir 5000 visas de résident temporaire (VRT) aux réfugiés de la bande de Gaza ayant de la famille au pays. Un an après son lancement, seules 550 personnes ont pu en bénéficier.

Selon les chiffres transmis au Devoir par le ministère de l’Immigration, des Réfugiés et de la Citoyenneté du Canada (IRCC), 4663 demandes de VRT avaient pourtant été acceptées pour traitement au 14 décembre dernier.

« Ces demandes de visa de résident temporaire sont en cours d’examen afin de déterminer leur recevabilité et leur admissibilité préliminaire », avance IRCC dans un échange écrit avec Le Devoir.

De ce nombre, seules 979 personnes ayant quitté la bande de Gaza par leurs propres moyens ont pu déposer leur demande, en Égypte pour la plupart, et ont été autorisées à venir au Canada. Et parmi elles, seules 550 sont effectivement arrivées au pays, soit moins de 12 % des demandes de VRT acceptées….

Source: En un an, le Canada a accueilli 550 réfugiés palestiniens

Canadian Immigration Tracker – November 2024

Highlights:

  • PR Admissions: Increase from 34,360 in October to 36,820 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2022 in parentheses): Economic – PNP 25.0% (22.8%), Economic – Federal 38.2% (51.6%), Family 52.4% (84.0%), Refugees -19.3% (-12.6%)
    • Applications: Given time delays in entering application data, am using a six month time lag. Decrease from 54,001 in April to 44,040 in May. May year-over-year change (change from 2020): -10.7% (81.9%).
    • Express Entry and Arrima Invitations to Apply: Decline from 5,507 in November (0 Arrima) to 2,561 in December (0 Arrima). December year-over-year change (change from 2022): -84.2% (23.3%)
    • TR to PRs transition (i.e., those already in Canada): Increase from 13,135 in October (38.2% of all PRs) to 17,390 in November (47.2% of all PRs). November year-over-year change (change from 2022): 65.3% (347.0%)
  • Temporary Residents:
    • TRs/IMP: Decrease from 60,945 in October to 48,560 in November. November year-over-year (change from 2022): Agreements: 29.0% (-30.4%), Canadian Interests: -11.4% (-7.5%), Other IMP Participants -47.7% (105.2%), Not stated -39.8% (-43.4%)
      • IMP by occupation code: not meaningful given only about 10 percent have NOC codes
    • TRs/TFWP: Stable from 11,860 in October to 11,540. November year-over-year change (change from 2022): Caregivers 12.2% (19.6%), Agriculture -1.1% (-20.0%) and Other LMIA 6.3% (32.6%).
    • TRs by occupation code (September, updated quarterly): 39.8% low-wage (D), year-over-year (D) change (change from 2022) 14.0% (157.4%)
  • Students: Decrease from 32,100 in October to 28,470 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2023): All -3.1% (22.0%), post-secondary -1.4% (22.7%)
    • Applications: Decrease from 40,846 in October to 39,759 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2021): -53.6% (-49.3%)
    • Web Get a study permit: Increase from 29,396 in October to 51,416 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2022): -0.1% (-25.0%) (December data not released)
  • Asylum Claimants: Decrease from 14,155 in October to 12,590 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2022): -22.9% (28.5%)
    • Irregular arrivals (Roxham Road etc): Increase from 62 in October to 79 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2021): 21.5% (-97.9%).
  • Settlement Services (2023): Increase from 1,941,480 in 2022 to 2,960,330 in 2023 (most recent data, services, not unique clients). 2023 year-over-year (change from 2021): 52.5% (53.3%)
  • Citizenship: Stable from 26,082 in October to 25,234 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2022): -28.9% (-29.1%)
    • Applications (2023): From 264,231 in 2022 to 317,538 in 2023. 2023 Year-over-year change (change from 2021): 20.2%% (36.3%)
  • Visitor Visas: Stable from 102,304 in October to 100,845 in November. November year-over-year change (change from 2022): -34.2% (-24.9%).

https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/canadian-immigration-tracker-key-slides-november-2024-pdf/274868539