Bernhard: Canada’s most valuable import is talent – we need more of it

Not the more, but the who:

…A confident Canada would stop dwelling on arbitrary immigration targets and instead recruit people who have solved the very challenges we’re currently stuck on, in whatever numbers are required. Fundamentally, we have a mindset problem. We’re stuck in the antiquated paradigm where hardscrabble immigrants arrive with $5 in their pockets and build good lives upon hard work and Canadian generosity. In this paradigm, immigration is a favour we do for immigrants. 

But today’s truth is that immigration is one of Canada’s top three talent development pathways, alongside our education system and our innovation industries. We often fault immigrants for lacking Canadian experience, while ironically overlooking the pre-Canadian experience they have in solving the precise problems we face.

Canada is a great country, but we face many serious challenges. Talented people around the world have solved our problems – only they’ve done it elsewhere. They know how to do what we don’t. We can build a strong, sovereign Canada by recruiting them to play for our team. 

Source: Canada’s most valuable import is talent – we need more of it

How US views of immigration have changed since Trump took office, according to Gallup polling

Impact of Trump administration over reach and repressive policies:

Just months after President Donald Trump returned to office amid a wave of anti-immigration sentiment, the share of U.S. adults saying immigration is a “good thing” for the country has jumped substantially — including among Republicans, according to new Gallup polling.

About 8 in 10 Americans, 79%, say immigration is “a good thing” for the country today, an increase from 64% a year ago and a high point in the nearly 25-year trend. Only about 2 in 10 U.S. adults say immigration is a bad thing right now, down from 32% last year.

During Democratic President Joe Biden’s term in office, negative views of immigration had increased markedly, reaching a high point in the months before Trump, a Republican, took office. The new Gallup data suggests U.S. adults are returning to more pro-immigrant views that could complicate Trump’s push for sweeping deportations and other anti-immigration policies. The poll shows decreasing support for the type of mass deportations Trump has championed since before he was elected. 

Since taking office, Trump has called on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to do all in its power to deliver “the single largest Mass Deportation Program in History.” His administration has also pushed to limit access to federal benefits for immigrants who lack legal status, sought to revoke the citizenship of immigrants who commit crimes and is working to end birthright citizenship for children born to those without legal status or who are in the country temporarily….

Source: How US views of immigration have changed since Trump took office, according to Gallup polling

Sullivan: Trump’s Deportation Stormtroopers

Accurate take:

….I cite all this not to diminish any of today’s awfulness, but to see it more clearly. We have been a brutal deportation nation long before our Trumpian 21st Century gambit. What’s different now, it seems to me, are four things: the sheer scale of it; the frantic pursuit of quantity over quality; the relative paucity of resources for courts and judges; and the fact that the enforcers are anonymous, masked, and unknowable — and will soon be on every street in America.

ICE will now have more resources than all but 15 countries’ military budgets, and is set to grow from an annual budget of $10 billion to $150 billion over four years. This is a ramp up of mind-boggling size and speed. Some of it will be helped by deputizing the military to some tasks, including, as we saw in Los Angeles this week, performative acts of intimidation. Garrett Graff notesthe inevitable result of such spurts;

“Hiring standards fall, training is cut short, field training officers end up being too inexperienced to do the right training, and supervisors are too green to know how to enforce policies and procedures well. … [We’ll likely see] a tidal wave of applicants who are specifically attracted by the rough-em-up, masked secret police tactics, no-holds-barred lawlessness that ICE has pursued since January.”

And indeed the evidence of such recruits exists. From a recent ICE jobs fair:

“I spoke to a gregarious New York police officer who was fed up with patrolling Times Square and all “the savages” there. Another applicant said he was sick of installing office furniture in properties subleased by the United States Marines.”

And the order is now a simple one: arrest and detain as many as you can: old, young, criminal, lawful, children, those who have lived here for decades with no incident — alongside drug traffickers. Child rapists alongside landscapers. Gang members alongside church regulars. And the percentage of violent criminals is quickly dwindling — only 8 percent of all detainees this year, according to CBS.

Miller is demanding that ICE beat Obama’s record of 438,421 removals in one year, by any means necessary. In fact, he wants Operation Wetback’s numbers in one year rather than ten. Trump’s daily quota was initially 1,800; then Miller pushed it to 3,000; and now Tom Homan says, “Do the math, we have to arrest 7,000 every single day for the remainder of this administration just to catch the ones Biden released into the nation.” And that’s a sky-high goal made much, much, much harder when there are so few deportations at the Southern border. No wonder ICE officers are drained.

Resources to speed up trials and shorten detentions by adding more immigration courts and judges? A mere $3.3 billion. A 2023 analysis by the Congressional Research Service found we need more than 1,300 judges to make progress on the backlog of cases. But the bill actually caps the numberat 800. You mean we could process deportations too quickly? E-Verify is off the table. So what this policy represents is actually a dramatic increase in the backlog of cases, meaning ever-more arrests, and ever-more people in custody, for ever-more years. Why, one wonders? Why not make real progress on the backlog in the courts, and leave less need for mass detention?

And those tasked with enforcing all this will be anonymous. That is utterly new — and a deeply authoritarian and un-American development. Thousands of men and women with the power to seize anyone off the street will have no faces, no badges, no identification, and often no uniform. We are told the reason for this is that the families of the “brave” ICE officers can be doxxed by enraged citizens and potentially harassed or threatened. In the words of one officer:

“We wear masks not to scare people, but to protect our families. If our faces are known, our children and spouses could be threatened at school, at church, or even at the grocery store.”

But this logic applies to every single law enforcement officer anywhere — to anyone in public anywhere — and yet only the ICE officers get to look like Putin’s thugs. If cops can’t wear masks, and must have ID, neither should ICE cops. Threats to and assaults of them — 79 incidents this year out of a workforce of 20,000, we’re told — can and should be strongly prosecuted. But masks have to go. If we’re going to call ICE officers brave, then showing their faces in public is the least they can do. …

America not as a shining city on a hill, nor as a republic diligently enforcing its immigration laws as humanely as possible. But as a potential gulag for the ages. 

Source: Trump’s Deportation Stormtroopers

Border bill would create ‘in limbo’ foreign residents, refugee groups say 

Usual critique by advocates, with no analysis of numbers likely to be affected or recognition of previous abuses:

A federal crackdown on asylum claims would create a new “in limbo” class of foreign residents who couldn’t be returned home but who would be barred from asylum hearings and unable to work in Canada, refugee groups say.

They are warning government officials that the Strong Borders Act, which was introduced before MPs went on summer break, would lead to people living without status in Canada if their home countries are deemed too dangerous for them to be returned to.

The legislation, also known as Bill C-2, would tighten up Canada’s immigration and asylum system, barring people who arrived in Canada more than a year ago from having an asylum claim heard by the independent Immigration and Refugee Board. Applicants to the IRB can qualify for work permits and health coverage while they wait for assessments. 

The restriction would apply to people who entered the country after June 24, 2020, even if they have since left and returned.

Bill C-2 would also prevent people who crossed the U.S. border illegally from claiming asylum if they have been in Canada for at least 14 days, which is currently permitted under a provision of the Safe Third Country Agreement with the United States….

Source: Border bill would create ‘in limbo’ foreign residents, refugee groups say

Lederman: We need to talk about antisemitism

Comments highlight need:

…What is happening in Gaza is catastrophic. But comparisons to the Holocaust are inaccurate, unnecessary and damaging. And, arguably, antisemitic.

Would any of this be okay if it was directed at any other minority group? 

One could argue it’s Zionists being targeted, not Jews. But most Jews are Zionists, believing a State of Israel has a right to exist. Further, too often, “Zionist” is a convenient substitute for “Jew.”

Criticism of the Israeli government is absolutely fair. But veering into antisemitism does nothing for the worthy Palestinian cause. If anything, it taints it. It is distracting, divisive and counterproductive. 

The same “fixed it” social-media crowd might write, about this column, “I’m not reading all that. Free Palestine.”

Yes, Palestinians deserve to be free. And Jews in Canada deserve to feel safe in their own country.

Source: We need to talk about antisemitism

L’immigration par réunification familiale pratiquement barrée au Québec d’ici juin 2026

Of note:

Les personnes souhaitant faire venir leur conjoint ou leur enfant de 18 ans et plus au Québec ne pourront plus en faire la demande jusqu’en juin 2026.

Le ministère de l’Immigration, de la Francisation et de l’Intégration (MIFI) a annoncé mercredi avoir atteint le nombre maximal de demandes de parrainage permises pour un époux, un conjoint, un partenaire conjugal ou un enfant à charge de 18 ans et plus. La voie du regroupement familial sera donc pratiquement fermée d’ici le 26 juin 2026, date à laquelle de nouvelles requêtes pourront de nouveau être émises.

Entretemps, « toute demande reçue par le MIFI après l’atteinte du nombre maximal de demandes pouvant être reçues et qui vise ces membres de la famille sera retournée aux personnes demandeuses sans être traitée », a précisé le ministère, mercredi. « Les frais exigés pour l’examen de la demande ne seront pas encaissés. »

À l’heure actuelle, la catégorie de la réunification familiale ne reste donc ouverte qu’aux personnes souhaitant parrainer leur père, leur mère, un grand-parent ou un autre membre de leur parenté.

Aucune limite n’est appliquée non plus aux demandes de parrainage d’un enfant de moins de 18 ans.

Source: L’immigration par réunification familiale pratiquement barrée au Québec d’ici juin 2026

People wishing to bring their spouse or child aged 18 and over to Quebec will no longer be able to apply until June 2026.

The Ministry of Immigration, Francisation and Integration (MIFI) announced on Wednesday that it had reached the maximum number of sponsorship applications allowed for a spouse, spouse, conjugal partner or dependent child aged 18 and over. The route of family reunification will therefore be practically closed by June 26, 2026, when new requests can be issued again.

In the meantime, “any request received by the MIFI after the maximum number of applications that can be received has been reached and that targets these family members will be returned to the applicants without being processed,” the ministry said on Wednesday. “The fees required for the examination of the application will not be collected. ”

At present, the category of family reunification remains open only to people wishing to sponsor their father, mother, a grandparent or another member of their relatives.

There are also no limits for sponsorship requests for a child under the age of 18.

Morton: Why Hiring Professors With Conservative Views Could Backfire on Conservatives

Interesting argument. But greater ideological diversity and openness would be welcome:

…Conservatives have criticized identity-based affirmative action because, they suggest, it imposes an expectation on students of color that they will represent what is presumed to be, say, the Black or Latino view on any given issue, which discourages freethinking. Admitting students for viewpoint diversity would turn the holding of conservative ideas into a quasi-identity, subject to some of the same concerns. Students admitted to help restore ideological balance would likely feel a responsibility to defend certain views, regardless of the force of opposing arguments they might encounter.

For professors hired for their political beliefs, the pressure to maintain those views would be even greater. If you had a tenure-track position, your salary, health insurance and career prospects would all depend on the inflexibility of your ideology. The smart thing to do in that situation would be to interact with other scholars who share your point of view and to read publications that reinforce what you already believe. Or you might simply engage with opposing ideas in bad faith, refusing even to consider their merits. This would create the sort of ideological echo chamber that proponents of viewpoint diversity have suggested, often with some justification, leads to closed-mindedness among left-leaning professors…

Jennifer M. Morton, professor of philosophy at the University of Pennsylvania

Source: Why Hiring Professors With Conservative Views Could Backfire on Conservatives

Attorneys Say They Can’t See Immigration Clients At Alligator Alcatraz

Of note:

Immigration attorneys say they have been unable to see their clients sent to the Alligator Alcatraz detention facility in Florida. Donald Trump toured the state-run camp with Governor Ron DeSantis (R-FL) and implied immigrants would be deterred from escaping because nearby alligators would eat them. In the haste to build and promote the facility, including by selling online merchandise, Florida and Trump officials neglected to provide access to attorneys and ensure detained immigrants could be located and meet with legal representatives to guarantee due process.

Attorneys with clients at Alligator Alcatraz, built in the Florida Everglades, criticize the lack of due process and access to counsel, and express concerns about the conditions. The Miami Herald described detainees suffering from mosquito bites, days without showers and “scant sunlight coming through the heavy-duty tents, making it difficult for them to know whether it is day or night.”

Two weeks have passed since a Florida Highway Patrol officer arrested the Honduran immigrant client of Magdalena Cuprys of Cuprys & Associates. “He was stopped at a weigh station in Tampa because he owns a construction company, and he was required to stop for his truck to be weighed,” Cuprys told me. “The client had a valid Florida driver’s license. The patrol officer called Customs and Border Protection on him. The client called me, and the officer took the phone from him and spoke with me.”

She asked why CBP was alerted. “I was advised that the client looked Hispanic, had a Hispanic name, and now they are collaborating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement and CBP, and their orders are to call CBP any time they encounter anyone they suspect is an immigrant,” said Cuprys. “I asked if they would have followed the same process if it had been me driving, and the response was it depends if you look Hispanic.”…

Source: Attorneys Say They Can’t See Immigration Clients At Alligator Alcatraz

StatsCan: The role of social connections in mitigating the harms associated with discrimination, 2023/2024

Makes intuitive sense that social connections mitigate impacts of discrimination:

In 2023/2024, 45% of all racialized Canadians reported experiencing discrimination over the previous five years. While discrimination has been related to negative mental and physical health, lower levels of life satisfaction and reduced hopefulness about the future, these outcomes become less pronounced when victims of discriminatory acts have strong personal support networks.

Among racialized Canadians who reported experiencing discrimination in the previous five years, one-third (33%) reported having a high level of life satisfaction (scoring 8 or higher on a 10-point scale). This proportion increased to 47% among victims with strong family connections and to 49% for those with strong friend connections. Mental health outcomes and future outlook also fared better when victims had personal support networks.

These results are based on the new study released today, “Softening the blow of discrimination: The role of social connections in mitigating the harms associated with racism and discrimination,” which used the Survey Series on People and their Communities to look at the role of family and friends in mitigating the harms associated with discrimination among racialized Canadians. The study also examined how family and friend relationships can influence discrimination victims’ perceptions of other Canadians and broader Canadian society.

Source: Study: The role of social connections in mitigating the harms associated with discrimination, 2023/2024

Conservatives call for investigation into CBC after journalist resigns over ‘performative diversity, tokenism’

Interesting that Dhanraj represented by right leaning activist lawyer Marshall:

The Conservative party is calling for a parliamentary committee to investigate the CBC after journalist Travis Dhanraj resigned over the public broadcaster’s alleged “performative diversity, tokenism, a system designed to elevate certain voices and diminish others.”

Dhanraj was the host of Canada Tonight: With Travis Dhanraj on CBC. But he resigned on Monday, involuntarily, he says, because the CBC “has made it impossible for me to continue my work with integrity.”

“I have been systematically sidelined, retaliated against, and denied the editorial access and institutional support necessary to fulfill my public service role,” he wrote in his resignation letter. “I stayed as long as I could, but CBC leadership left me with no reasonable path forward.”

On Wednesday, Rachel Thomas, an Alberta Conservative member of Parliament, wrote a letter to the chair of the House of Commons standing committee on Canadian heritage, saying that Dhanraj’s claims have “reignited concerns about the organization’s workplace culture.”

The letter calls on the chair, Ontario Liberal MP Lisa Hepfner, to recall the committee.

“It is critical that we hear testimony from Mr. Dhanraj, CBC executives and Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture, Steven Guilbeault,” the letter states.

Kathryn Marshall, Dhanraj’s lawyer, told National Post in an interview that they welcome the attempt to recall the committee for hearings….

Source: Conservatives call for investigation into CBC after journalist resigns over ‘performative diversity, tokenism’