First- or second-generation Canadian children?

[QCtoONviaUS]

I'm an American citizen married to a Canadian citizen moving to Canada in the near future, and I'm not sure of our children's citizenship status/eligibility, especially since citizenship law has changed twice since my husband left Canada (2007).

My husband was born in the US to one Canadian parent, moved to Canada as a child, and has proof of Canadian citizenship (passport + citizenship card), and lived there for over a decade before moving back to the US. We married in the US and had our children here, both in the years between the two most recent revisions to citizenship law (2009/2017, right?).

Is my husband a first- or second- generation Canadian citizen for these purposes? And are our children citizens automatically, upon application for proof of citizenship, conditional on settling in Canada, or not at all?

Thanks a lot, because I'm thoroughly confused.

 

[keesio]

I believe your children are considered 2nd generation board abroad (born outside Canada to a Canadian parent who was also born outside Canada.). hence not automatically Canadian citizens.

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/canadian-citizenship/act-changes/rules-2009-2015.html

as mentioned in the link above:

if you weren’t already a Canadian citizen by April 17, 2009, and were born outside Canada to a Canadian parent, you aren’t Canadian if your Canadian parent was:

• also born outside Canada to a Canadian parent
  • this would make you the second or subsequent generation born outside Canada

 

[QCtoONviaUS]

Thanks!
That's the part that confuses me - I took the parent "also born outside Canada to a Canadian parent" to mean one that never lived in Canada. At what point does the "generational clock" restart? (Take naturalized citizens, by contrast.)

If our children aren't citizens by that standard, is sponsorship the only option?

 

[screech339]

Thanks!
That's the part that confuses me - I took the parent "also born outside Canada to a Canadian parent" to mean one that never lived in Canada. At what point does the "generational clock" restart? (Take naturalized citizens, by contrast.)

If our children aren't citizens by that standard, is sponsorship the only option?

Yes, PR sponsorship is your only option. You can sponsor them for PR and then he/she can qualify to apply for citizenship. They would become naturalized Canadian and will have ability to pass on citizenship to their children (your grandchildren)

 

[QCtoONviaUS]

Thanks! Interesting and somewhat paradoxical.

 

[screech339]

Thanks! Interesting and somewhat paradoxical.

It is not paradoxical. The rule was changed to prevent automatic passing of citizenship for generations. This will lead to future pool of Canadians never having any connections or ties to Canada other than having a Canadian passport all because their great great grandfather/grandmother was born in Canada or a naturalized Canadian.

Without any limits, one Canadian Great Great grandparent can make up to 120 Canadians descendants assuming each child makes 3 additional more each family generation down. So you can see how only ONE Canadian can make a huge pool of family of Canadians after just 4 generations abroad.

 

[QCtoONviaUS]

It is not paradoxical. The rule was changed to prevent automatic passing of citizenship for generations. This will lead to future pool of Canadians never having any connections or ties to Canada other than having a Canadian passport all because their great great grandfather/grandmother was born in Canada or a naturalized Canadian.

I understand that, but in this case (where my husband actually lived in Canada for more than 10 years), this results in the children of a citizen by birth have less of a claim to citizenship than the equivalent case with children of a citizen by naturalization - hence the 'paradoxical' part.

 

[screech339]

I understand that, but in this case (where my husband actually lived in Canada for more than 10 years), this results in the children of a citizen by birth have less of a claim to citizenship than the equivalent case with children of a citizen by naturalization - hence the 'paradoxical' part.

We had that rule. Prior to the rule change, a Canadian born abroad can retain citizenship by applying before turning 21. This still didn't limit passing on citizenship for generations. The Lebanese Canadians wanting Canada to bail them out during the war brought out the obvious flaw.

While it is not a perfect system, the 2nd generation limit was the best solution. If one want to stay outside Canada for generations, nothing to stopping them from doing that. If they want to keep ties to Canada after the 2nd generation, at least make an effect to establish some roots to Canada. For example, sponsor your child for PR. This would be one good example. You would have to prove that you are actually plan on moving to Canada to sponsor the children for PR. IRCC will not just give out PR to dependents without any proofs of actually moving to Canada. There have been cases of PR denials to spouses / dependants because they were not ready to move to Canada yet. Examples of "I need to stay in US to finish my degree first". When PR status are issued, they expect you to move and settle in Canada by set deadline date.

 

[zardoz]

I understand that, but in this case (where my husband actually lived in Canada for more than 10 years), this results in the children of a citizen by birth have less of a claim to citizenship than the equivalent case with children of a citizen by naturalization - hence the 'paradoxical' part.

There will always be edge cases or anomalies. However, those are the current legislation conditions. If you want to change them, Parliament is the only way.

 

[keesio]

I understand that, but in this case (where my husband actually lived in Canada for more than 10 years), this results in the children of a citizen by birth have less of a claim to citizenship than the equivalent case with children of a citizen by naturalization - hence the 'paradoxical' part.

Yes it does seem a bit unfair. This is a case of where IRCC took the stance of "one bad apple spoils the whole bunch". Before the rule came into effect, passing citizenship by descent was exploited in a few cases. Hence this blanket rule that effects everyone.

It is similar to another issue that we US expats experience regarding our US tax obligations. The US has this blanket requirement that negatively impacts expats abroad in the hopes to find a few tax evaders.

 

[hawk39]

I'm an American citizen married to a Canadian citizen moving to Canada in the near future, and I'm not sure of our children's citizenship status/eligibility, especially since citizenship law has changed twice since my husband left Canada (2007).

My husband was born in the US to one Canadian parent, moved to Canada as a child, and has proof of Canadian citizenship (passport + citizenship card), and lived there for over a decade before moving back to the US. We married in the US and had our children here, both in the years between the two most recent revisions to citizenship law (2009/2017, right?).

Is my husband a first- or second- generation Canadian citizen for these purposes? And are our children citizens automatically, upon application for proof of citizenship, conditional on settling in Canada, or not at all?

Thanks a lot, because I'm thoroughly confused.

Was your husband born before February 15, 1977?

If so, did he get his birth registered within two years of his birth at a Canadian embassy or consulate, or anytime between February 15, 1977 and August 14, 2004 during the delayed registration period?

If so, then I think he would be regarded as a natural-born Canadian (subjected to the Act that was being enforced the year he was born and not the 2009 Act), and your children would then be considered first-generation born abroad and eligible for citizenship by descent today.

 

[alphazip]

That's a good point, though in this case the OP states that the children were born between the years 2009 and 2017. As of April 17, 2009, citizenship by descent was limited to the first generation born abroad. So, even if the OP's husband had been born before 1977 and his birth registered (I think, based on the dates involved, he was more likely born in the 80s), he was still born abroad. Therefore, any children of his born after April 17, 2009 would not be Canadian citizens by descent.

 

[CanadianFrank]

That's a good point, though in this case the OP states that the children were born between the years 2009 and 2017. As of April 17, 2009, citizenship by descent was limited to the first generation born abroad. So, even if the OP's husband had been born before 1977 and his birth registered (I think, based on the dates involved, he was more likely born in the 80s), he was still born abroad. Therefore, any children of his born after April 17, 2009 would not be Canadian citizens by descent.

This is quite interesting because I was born abroad before 1977 and was registered within two years of my birth at a Canadian embassy during the delayed registration period (I'm a Canadian citizen). Does this mean that if I have children who are born abroad in the next few years that they would be eligible for Canadian citizenship?

 

[canuck78]

This is quite interesting because I was born abroad before 1977 and was registered within two years of my birth at a Canadian embassy during the delayed registration period (I'm a Canadian citizen). Does this mean that if I have children who are born abroad in the next few years that they would be eligible for Canadian citizenship?

No your children will not gain citizenship through you. You’d need to sponsor them and return to Canada.