Category Archive

We speak with Daniel Bernhard of the Institute for Canadian Citizenship about understanding immigrant retention in Canada. The Paper comes at a time when immigration to Canada is declining, outflows are increasing and the aging of Canada’s population accelerates.

When immigration applications take longer than expected, one common reason is security screening. Several government agencies are involved in this process, and one of the organizations that provides oversight is the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (the “NSIRA”). The NSIRA is an independent review body created by Parliament in 2019. Its role is to oversee the national security and intelligence activities of federal agencies such as the Canada Border Services Agency (“CBSA”), the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (“CSIS”), and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (“RCMP”). This includes reviewing how these agencies handle immigration and citizenship security screening. All immigration and citizenship applications involve background checks. In many cases, this is straightforward and completed quickly. However, for some applicants, the process can involve: CBSA: verifying admissibility to Canada; CSIS: conducting security assessments where potential risks are identified; RCMP: checking law enforcement records. If additional information is needed, applications may remain under review for an extended period. Role of the NSIRA The NSIRA does not process applications or make immigration decisions. Instead, its job is to review whether the activities of agencies like CBSA and CSIS are lawful, reasonable, and carried out properly. In addition to broad oversight, the NSIRA also … Read More

  Steven and Deanna analyze the IRCC Minister’s Transition Binder (May 2025) and its implications for processing times, including extraordinary ranges for several programs. The discussion addresses potential use of Bill C-2 authorities to suspend or terminate processing, operational realities in caregiver and Start-Up Visa files, and current dynamics in Francophone pathways. A concluding Q&A covers Express Entry eligibility, quotas, and Francophone mobility. Chapter Guide 5:37 — H&C processing time range (12–600 months) 8:12 — Start-Up Visa (420 months) 11:06 — CEC/PNP targets and provincial quota adjustments 13:04 — Bill C-2 (Stronger Border Act): scope of cancellation/suspension powers 31:03 — Live Q&A Borderlines is a Canadian immigration law podcast hosted by Steven Meurrens and Deanna Okun-Nachoff, providing in-depth analysis of immigration law, policy, and case law trends. This episode contains general information only and does not constitute legal advice.

Canada’s immigration regulations recognize that some foreign nationals may need to work while their status is being resolved. Section 206 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (IRPR) allows work permits to be issued to individuals who cannot support themselves without employment, including: Refugee claimants whose case has been referred to the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) of the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) but has not yet been decided [R206(1)(a)]. Individuals subject to an unenforceable removal order [R206(1)(b)]. When is a Removal Order Enforceable in Canada? Under Canada’s immigration law, a removal order only becomes enforceable when it comes into force and all conditions for a stay are lifted. Until then, many removal orders remain “on hold.” Conditional Removal Orders for Refugee Claimants Most refugee claimants are issued conditional removal orders, which remain unenforceable while their claim is being decided. The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) outlines specific situations when a removal order comes into force for claimants. Who Else Has an Unenforceable Removal Order? Several categories of people may be under a removal order but cannot actually be removed from Canada until certain steps are completed: Failed refugee claimants who are appealing their Immigration and Refugee Board decision. … Read More

Steven and Deanna break down the collapse in internaitonal student arrivals in 2025 and plumetting approval rates across nearly all programs. . 2:14 2025 stats: what the data says 4:01 Cap vs. collapse in student entries 7:12 Worker levels and category context 21:37 Approval-rate declines and rule-of-law concerns 33:47 Category approval snapshots (CEC/FSW/Francophone/H&C) 38:45 Live Q&A

Comparison of EE Candidates Invited to Apply in January and February, 2021 2025 approval rates

  Steve and Deanna break down the latest political heat on the Temporary Foreign Worker Program. What is the TFWP? Will Direct Apply meaningfully fix it? Timestamps 1:40 Today’s focus: abolish/reform the TFWP? 7:42 TFWP vs IMP—what’s where 10:26 LMIA fundamentals: wage, recruitment, Job Bank 18:02 Direct Apply: what changes 34:32 Q&A starts

On this episode of the Borderlines podcast, Deanna Okun-Nachoff and guest co-host Zeynab Ziaie Moayyed speak with constitutional law guru Sujit Choudhry. We discuss Choudhry’s work on the landmark Bjorkquist case, in which the Ontario Superior Court held that the Canadian Citizenship Act’s “second-generation cut-off rule” was unconstitutional. Choudhry also describes his involvement in subsequent proceedings in which Canada has repeatedly failed to comply with court-ordered mandates to correct the non-compliance. We also delve into test case litigation at the crossroads of immigration and constitutional law. Choudhry describes factors he considers in selecting test cases, techniques for managing participants in a class action, choosing a venue (i.e. why proceed at federal vs. provincial court – ?), and factors that make issues at the nexus of immigration and constitutional law such a hotspot for strategic litigation. Finally, we discuss Bill C-2 (currently before the House), which proposes fundamental changes to the Canadian immigration scheme (not to mention privacy law, criminal, charitable, anti-terrorism, etc). Our focus is on allegations that the law proposed may not be Charter compliant, which leads to braoder consideration of the government’s decision to introduce this legislation in the first place.

A discussion about Mac’s Convenience Stores Inc. v. Basyal, 2025 BCCA 284. A discussion about Mac’s Convenience Stores Inc. v. Basyal, 2025 BCCA 284.