Sean Rehaag is an Associate Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, the Director of the Centre for Refugee Studies and the Director of the Refugee Law Laboratory. Today we discuss his use of GPT to conduct legal research, artificial intelligence and decision making, differential results in Federal Court and Immigration and Refugee Board decisions, and how to identify if differential outcomes are actually a problem or significant.2:00 Using GPT to conduct research. 14:00 Issues with unreported decisions or decisions lacking precedential value. Do all decisions need to have precedential value given that it results in inconsistent jurisprudence? 19:00 AI making decisions vs. AI helping to write decisions. 22:00 Bias in decision making in LGBT claims around physical appearance. 28:00 AI leading to uniformity in decision making. 38:00 The receptiveness of the Federal Court to research into judicial decision making. 42:00 Forum shopping as a result of judicial research. 46:00 Should AI play a role in helping judges write decisions. 52:00 Baker as an example of transparency in decision making. 54:00 Is it possible to tell if AI is starting to render unintended decisions? 1:05 Trauma in refugee decision making. 1:14 How do you decide if differential results are problematic? For example, asylum claims for lesbians are higher than gay which is also higher than bi. Is this a problem?
Raj Sharma is an immigration lawyer in Calgary. He can be found on Twitter at @immlawyercanada Topics: 1:30 – Addressing divergent case law 15:30 – Globe and Mail story about waiving TRV eligibility requirements to clear backlogs 23:00 – Chat GTP replacing lawyers and visa officers 31:00 – Processing delays 36:00 – Mandamus 42:00 – Open work permits for spouses of Canadians 56:00 – C-10 work permits and Express Entry 57:00 – A world in which GCMS notes are provided instead of refusal letters 1:00 – Is the practice of immigration law getting less fun?
Tamara Mosher Kuczer is the Founder & Principal Lawyer of Lighthouse Immigration Law Professional Corporation. She can be found on Twitter @ttrrmk.5:00 How would you summarize 2022 for Canadian immigration? 13:23 Favorite development in Canadian immigration law 25:00 Least favorite development in Canadian immigration 39:15 Favorite Federal Court decision 52:00 What should people watch the most in 2023 56:00 What might happen this year that people might not be expecting? 1:04 What will happen with the Self-Employed Class and Start-Up Visa Program? 1:09 Will Express Entry take under 6 months again and will there be a draw in the Parent & Grandparent Program? 1:12 Predictions for citizenship and abolishing PR Cards.
The Secure Air Travel Act provides the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness with authority to establish a list of individuals that the Minister has reasonable grounds to suspect could be a threat to aviation or national security or intends to travel by air for the purpose of terrorism. Sadaf Kashfi, works for Edelmann & Co. She advises clients on complex issues concerning U.S. and Canadian immigration, criminal law, and during the COVID-19 pandemic developed a successful practice representing individuals accused of quarantine act violations. Her e-mail is email@example.com The second, Eric Purtzi, is Associate Counsel at Fowler & Block, a criminal defense law firm. He has appeared at the Supreme Court of Canada 7 times. He is also a past guest on Borderlines, having appeared on episode 9 to discuss the constitutionality of retrospective laws. His e-mail is firstname.lastname@example.org How does the Secure Air Travel Act work? Who reviews naming on the Secure Air Travel Act? What is the threshold to be added to the list for possibly committing a crime in the air? Does the government have to publish how many people are on the list? How does someone learn that they are on the SATA list? What are the participatory rights for people to get off the SATA? How does the appeal or Federal Court process work? Could someone be put on SATA for refusing to wear a mask?