Second generation citizenship?

[rehhahn]

To enable me to relocate from the US to Canada, I am wondering if there is an opportunity for me to declare Canadian citizenship under the current state of ambiguity associated with the first generation limit.

My grandmother was Canadian, born in Ontario but moved to the US in 1929. Her daughter, my mother was, like me, born in the US. My mother has not spent any significant time living in Canada.

Today's statement from Minister Marc Miller lists groups that will be considered for discretionary grants of citizenship, including

• those born or adopted before December 19, 2023, who are subject to the first-generation limit

The statement does not specify any requirement of physical prescence in Canada.

Could I plausibly succeed in pursuing citizenship by descent under the current circumstances?

Ref:
https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/statement-canada-to-request-a-further-extension-to-maintain-first-generation-limit-to-canadian-citizenship-by-descent-806942288.html

 

[armoured]

To enable me to relocate from the US to Canada, I am wondering if there is an opportunity for me to declare Canadian citizenship under the current state of ambiguity associated with the first generation limit.

My grandmother was Canadian, born in Ontario but moved to the US in 1929. Her daughter, my mother was, like me, born in the US. My mother has not spent any significant time living in Canada.

Today's statement from Minister Marc Miller lists groups that will be considered for discretionary grants of citizenship, including

• those born or adopted before December 19, 2023, who are subject to the first-generation limit

The statement does not specify any requirement of physical prescence in Canada.

Could I plausibly succeed in pursuing citizenship by descent under the current circumstances?

Ref:
https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/statement-canada-to-request-a-further-extension-to-maintain-first-generation-limit-to-canadian-citizenship-by-descent-806942288.html

Plausibly, yes.

I'd post in the citizenship forum. As this has just happened, nobody is going to know precisely how this works (as in, all lawyers and everyone else going to be looking up). As stated by the Minister, this is exceptionally broad - but possibly government has or will provide more clarity.

I'm fairly experienced at parsing press releases and I've no idea what the 'consideration' referred to for such apps actually means. (Legally possibly nothing more than 'we won't reject them out of hand.' )

And a warning: it's clear there's going to be an election - soon. As in, so soon, it's almost impossible that many (or even any) of these applications will be completed before a new (after Carney's ministry tomorrow) post-election govt will be in place. This could completely change in eight weeks. (Perhaps a poisoned chalice for the next govt)

I'm going to go so far to say that the situation is so odd that it's even possible that it might be better to just apply ASAP and cross your fingers (eg if it comes to pass that a future govt puts some arbitrary 'those who applied before the election' rule). That's not advice, just saying this is a distinctly weird time.

 

[scylla]

To enable me to relocate from the US to Canada, I am wondering if there is an opportunity for me to declare Canadian citizenship under the current state of ambiguity associated with the first generation limit.

My grandmother was Canadian, born in Ontario but moved to the US in 1929. Her daughter, my mother was, like me, born in the US. My mother has not spent any significant time living in Canada.

Today's statement from Minister Marc Miller lists groups that will be considered for discretionary grants of citizenship, including

• those born or adopted before December 19, 2023, who are subject to the first-generation limit

The statement does not specify any requirement of physical prescence in Canada.

Could I plausibly succeed in pursuing citizenship by descent under the current circumstances?

Ref:
https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/statement-canada-to-request-a-further-extension-to-maintain-first-generation-limit-to-canadian-citizenship-by-descent-806942288.html

Under the current rules and today's announcement you do not qualify. See explanation here: https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/update-to-bill-c-71-the-legislation-to-fix-citizenship-by-descent.868501/

There is some possibility you may qualify in the future. However also possible that you won't qualify if your mother never lived in Canada. You'll have to wait and see.

 

[armoured]

There was news today that seems to clarify a bit, I summarized here:
https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/update-to-bill-c-71-the-legislation-to-fix-citizenship-by-descent.868501/post-11029101

 

[scylla]

There was news today that seems to clarify a bit, I summarized here:
https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/update-to-bill-c-71-the-legislation-to-fix-citizenship-by-descent.868501/post-11029101

It looks like it's going to be similar to some of the US rules around this which require the parent to have spent some minimal time in Canada in order to pass on citizenship. Fair enough from my perspective.

 

[armoured]

It looks like it's going to be similar to some of the US rules around this which require the parent to have spent some minimal time in Canada in order to pass on citizenship. Fair enough from my perspective.

Oh, that does seem to be what they're aiming at. What's odd is having to do this hack solution of effectively implementing a policy that's been discussed in a HoC committee/exists as a bill but before government can adopt it as a law, with a government that (almost certainly) won't be able to get it through before an election, etc.

Basically government instructing it will accept applications and (maybe, probably, if it gets re-elected) treat them in a way that might satisfy a court, pending legislation in future.

While not being able to aver in court - obviously - that any future govt will pass such legislation OR even process such applications this way.

All highly irregular. But it is what it is: basically a policy that will allow some Justice lawyer to argue in court that this is at least a plausible policy to enact while requesting another delay given politics 'beyond their control.' And that any broader order (eg to accept any and all apps) would create chaos.

The other side's lawyers will of course argue that this is not a specific enough policy even for now, and that a new government could toss all these apps out immediately after taking office (and that would be grossly unfair, etc). Which is true, except that a new government would still have to deal with the courts.