Immigration Law

Episode 30 – Excluding Family Members from Immigrating vs. Compassion, with Jamie Chai Yun Liew

Steven Meurrens

Jamie Chai Yun Liew is a law professor at University of Ottawa and an immigration lawyer. She acted for the Canadian Council for Refugees as intervener before the Supreme Court of Canada in Kanthasamy v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration). She can be found on Twitter @thechaiyun

Jamie, Peter, Deanna and Steven discusses humanitarian & compassionate considerations in Canadian immigration law, including the Supreme Court of Canada decisions in Baker and Kanthasamy. We also discussed Regulation 117(9)(d), which excludes unexamined family members from future sponsorship, and the recently announced pilot to mitigate the impact of this exclusion.

2:45 – What is Regulation 117(9)(d)?

6:30 – What is a Family Member?

7:00 – What does it mean to be “examined” for immigration purposes?

7:30 – What are the consequences of someone’s ability to immigrate to Canada if they have an inadmissible family member?

14:00 – How does IRPR r. 117(9)(d) work to exclude immigration?

15:45 – Why would someone not declare a family member when they immigrate?

26:00 – What options are available to bring a family member excluded by Regulation 117(9)(d) to Canada?

33:00 – What is the difference between a humanitarian & compassionate application vs. a family sponsorship?

36:00 – What was the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Baker?

39:00 – What was the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Kanthasamy?

50:00 – What were the Minister’s recent announcements regarding Regulation 117(9)(d)?

Episode 29 – Immigration Detention and Habeas Corpus, with Molly Joeck and Erica Olmstead

Steven Meurrens

Molly Joeck and Erica Olmstead are lawyers with Edelmann & Co. They, along with Peter Edelmann, acted for the Canadian Council for Refugees as interveners before the Supreme Court of Canada in Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Chhina.

In Chhina the issue before the Supreme Court was whether immigrant detainees have access to habeas corpus. We discuss Chhina, how immigration detention works in Canada, habeas corpus and issues going forward.

2:20 – Why would someone be detained in Canada for immigration reasons?

3:50 – In the federal detention review system who decides if an immigrant should be detained? What is the Immigration Division?

4:30 – How often would an immigrant who is detained have their detention reviewed?

5:30 – What are some issues arising with long term detention?

12:20 – Is there a difference in the issues that arise in long term detention in Ontario as opposed to British Columbia?

18:00 – Is an immigrant refusing to assist with removal by not getting a passport grounds for detention?

24:30 – What is habeas corpus?

27:30 – Why would someone in immigration detention want access to habeas corpus?

30:30 – Why is habeas corpus an alternative to federal court judicial review?

36:00 – The majority in Chhina appears to have commented negatively on certain aspects of the federal detention review process without striking it down. Why did they not just strike it down?

41:00 – How long do habeas corpus applications take?

46:00 – How many times can someone file habeas corpus applications?

51:00 – How has the Immigration Division reacted to the spate of habeas applications?

57:00 – How do detention review cases make it to the Federal Court of Appeal?

Episode 28 – Canada’s Caregiver Programs

Steven Meurrens

Natalie Drolet is the Executive Director / Staff Lawyer for the Migrant Workers Centre.

We discuss the history of Canada’s caregiver programs, current issues and what the future looks like.

2:30 – What is a caregiver and how have Canada’s caregiver work permit and immigration programs traditionally worked?

7:00 – What are employer specific work permits? How do these impact caregivers?

14:40 – How do Canadian caregivers find families who are overseas?

16:00 – Why is the caregiver program necessary? Why are Canadians not applying for these positions? What role do wages play?

21:10 – How does the Interim Pathways program work?

29:14 – Could an Expression of Interest Intake model come to the caregiver program?

31:30 – What are employer compliance issues in the caregiver program? What are some of the abuses that occur?

38:00 – Are the problems now similar to problems that the program has traditionally faced?

43:00 – Where do caregivers live out typically stay?

45:00 – What will the program likely look at in the future?

56:00 – Do the caregiver programs allow governments to avoid funding daycare?

57:30 – Where do most caregivers come from?

Episode 17 – Issues with PreClearance at Customs Offices, with Michael Greene

Steven Meurrens

The Liberal Government of Canada has introduced legislation that will expand the use of preclearance facilities by United States border officials in Canada, and authorize Canada to set up such facilities in the United States.

Michael Greene, Q.C. is an immigration lawyer in Calgary. He served as the National Chair of the Canadian Bar Association’s Citizenship & Immigration Section in 2000-2001. He can be reached at mgreene@sgimm.ca

Michael joins to provide an overview of Bill C-23, the Preclearance Act, and resulting issues including the presence of armed US border officials in Canada, detention, the application of the Charter and the potential denial of entry to Canadian permanent residents.

The United States currently operates border preclearance facilities at a number of airports and ports in Canada. These are staffed and operated by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers. Travelers pass through U.S. Immigration and Customs, Public Health, and Agriculture inspections before boarding their aircraft, ship, or train.

Bill C-23 will:

  • provide United States preclearance officers with enhanced powers, including the ability to carry firearms;
  • establish that the exercise of any power and performance of any duty or function by a United States preclearance officer is subject to Canadian law, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian Bill of Rights and the Canadian Human Rights Act;
  • authorizes Canadian police officers and the officers of the Canada Border Services Agency to assist United States preclearance officers in the exercise of their powers and performance of their duties and functions;
  • allows a traveller bound for the United States to withdraw from the preclearance process, unless the traveller is detained;
  • authorize Canada to set up preclearance facilities in the United States;
  • specifies how Canadian immigration law will apply to travellers bound for Canada who are in preclearance areas and preclearance perimeters in the United States, and extends the application of other Canadian legislation that relates to the entry of persons and importation of goods into Canada to those preclearance areas and preclearance perimeters; and
  • deems an act or omission committed in a preclearance area or preclearance perimeter to be committed in Canada, if the act or omission would constitute, in Canada, an offence relating to the entry of persons or importation of goods into Canada.

The Canadian Bar Association’s comments can be found here – http://www.cba.org/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=1b0e8f11-c92b-4d80-859b-1e06c379a538

A copy of the Agreement on Land, Rail, Marine and Air Transport Preclearance Between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America is embedded below.

http://meurrensonimmigration.com/wp-content/uploads/Preclearance-Agreement-reduced-size.pdf