US vs. Canada.... Green Card vs. Citizenship, a weird request from judge!

[CanadianCountry]

Uk immigration interpretation can possibly be different. But according to Immigration minister the intent is up to the oath. Will be putting a short video shortly.

I respectfully have to disagree on this interpretation of the wording. I appreciate that this is contentious.
My understanding, based on the equivalent UK legislation is as follows.

Intend (from the date of application through to taking the oath) to reside (after citizenship has been granted). This does NOT mean that citizenship will be revoked if you leave Canada, unless CIC can prove that you lied with respect to the "intent".

 

[zardoz]

Uk immigration interpretation can possibly be different. But according to Immigration minister the intent is up to the oath. Will be putting a short video shortly.

I saw the video. I don't think that he understands / articulates it either. He's maybe not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

 

[CanadianCountry]

Please follow the link and listen till the end.
► 10:32► 10:32
www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMoa1vbxRWk
Jul 17, 2014 - Uploaded by Hosein Amooshahi
Clarification of "intention to reside in Canada" clause in the Bill C-24 by CIC Minister Chris ...

I respectfully have to disagree on this interpretation of the wording. I appreciate that this is contentious.
My understanding, based on the equivalent UK legislation is as follows.

Intend (from the date of application through to taking the oath) to reside (after citizenship has been granted). This does NOT mean that citizenship will be revoked if you leave Canada, unless CIC can prove that you lied with respect to the "intent".

 

[zardoz]

It's legalese and, frankly, it really doesn't matter what CA says. It's how the courts read and enforce it. Time will tell.

 

[CanadianCountry]

He is the final authority on the law. If you think he doesn't get, then in my opinion nobody in this world should be in the capacity to know. No CJ is a match,and we are just some ordinary souls.

But again I beg to differ, he is not as dumb as you may have him.

If you look at his body language in the video, he owned the hearing and showed who's the boss.

I saw the video. I don't think that he understands / articulates it either. He's maybe not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

 

[BLT]

Dear All,

A friend has US green card and is PR of Canada as well. She applied for Canadian citizenship, on the test day, judge did not grant her the citizenship until she provides a letter from US immigration saying that " the government of US does not have any problem with her getting Canadian citizenship AND indicating that she does not have any intention to live in US".

FYI last year she got her US green card, however she was in US just for one day and aha hasn't even started her residency in US.

Applicant contacted US consulate, she has been told that US gov. don't have issue with your application, but they can't issue any letter in this regard.

Any real experience or piece of advise would be highly appreciated.

The judge must be a construction worker being appointed randomly. Basically you cannot ask any country to make a statement regarding your personal issue with other country. Even 3rd world country won't do it, let alone USA.

 

[CanadianCountry]

Now that's a funny remark. ;D

The judge must be a construction worker being appointed randomly. Basically you cannot ask any country to make a statement regarding your personal issue with other country. Even 3rd world country won't do it, let alone USA.

 

[applicant314]

Until there are more confirmed cases, it's also possible that the applicant misunderstood the "judge". My interview after the test was held by a CIC Officer, not by a CIC judge. Hence, it might be that the "no intention to reside" in the US, is actually the CIC officer requesting that the applicant provides US-based documents that she did not reside in the States.

 

[CanadianCountry]

Doesn't makes any different if the request comes from CIC officer or the CJ.

Until there are more confirmed cases, it's also possible that the applicant misunderstood the "judge". My interview after the test was held by a CIC Officer, not by a CIC judge. Hence, it might be that the "no intention to reside" in the US, is actually the CIC officer requesting that the applicant provides US-based documents that she did not reside in the States.

 

[CanadianCountry]

By providing proofs of residence here in Canada, is itself a proof that the applicant didn't live in any other part of the world.

Or, is the CIC officer/ judge suggesting that the residence proofs from Canada are fake.

Until there are more confirmed cases, it's also possible that the applicant misunderstood the "judge". My interview after the test was held by a CIC Officer, not by a CIC judge. Hence, it might be that the "no intention to reside" in the US, is actually the CIC officer requesting that the applicant provides US-based documents that she did not reside in the States.

 

[applicant314]

Other applicants have reported that CIC seems to target people who hold an uncancelled work visa from other countries. There are several topics dealing with the cancelling procedure of visas from the middle east. This kind of thing seems to be more common, whereas the other is, I believe, unique in this forum. Also, I fail to comprehend how the US is supposed to issue a statement that a Green Card holder is not intending to reside in the US. 1. What's the point of the Green Card in the first place? 2. Why not demand a cancellation of the Green Card?

The difference between a judge and an officer is, that CIC Officers are doing the regular interviews, whereas the judges are involved after there's been a certain chain of events. So this might just be a regular request for additional documents. Also, the actual applicant didn't open the topic.
It's just not worth it to get all worked up about it until there is more information, it will just scare potential applicants.

 

[eileenf]

A friend has US green card and is PR of Canada as well. She applied for Canadian citizenship, on the test day, judge did not grant her the citizenship until she provides a letter from US immigration saying that " the government of US does not have any problem with her getting Canadian citizenship AND indicating that she does not have any intention to live in US".

I would hope that the CIC official (I've never heard of a judge being there for the test/interview unless it was a special process/accommodation) provided something in writing.

Have you seen it? The quote provided seems off. The "US government" cannot provide documents attesting to the applicant's intentions. Unless the CIC official/judge was asking for a copy of the green card application because they wanted to see if the applicant had declared an intention to live in the US?

As transcribed above though, this seems very muddled. We need more details. It would be important to know the exact wording in order to properly judge the way forward.

Also, your friend should probably speak to a lawyer.

Finally, where was this left? Does the applicant need to report back to the CIC with some documentation within a certain span of time?

 

[screech339]

This RQ request post application doesn't seem to mean much. It is like enforcement of intent to reside without any law backing the action on the part of CIC. Since as per current law there is nothing in law stating where the residency of an applicant must be post application.

But as per C -24, the residency upto the oath is in question.

I should have added more detail. The RQ was sent as the applicant was awaiting oath after doing the test. So when I said 3-4 month in future. I meant 3-4 months up to time of possible oath date. This may enforce the "intent to reside" clause during citizenship application process.

Screech339

 

[CanadianCountry]

Screech, in the mentioned scenario of post test pre-oath RQ if the applicant mentions his residence is out of Canada post application, then what is the outcome of it.

I understand that if he mentions in Canada then no doubt he will be fine.

I should have added more detail. The RQ was sent as the applicant was awaiting oath after doing the test. So when I said 3-4 month in future. I meant 3-4 months up to time of possible oath date. This may enforce the "intent to reside" clause during citizenship application process.

Screech339

 

[uzas]

I think that what a Canadian official might have asked is that the applicant provide a proof that he had declared in front of a U.S. immigration official that he does not intend to reside in the U.S., at which point the U.S. official would pronounce that the person has given up their U.S. residency and start the process to cancel it.

I.e. Canadian migration authorities cannot take away a U.S. permanent residency but may try to indirectly force an appilcant to give it up, by conditioning thir Canadian citizenship upon this. I don't believe this is within the present or incoming law, but it's understandable that they may do it.

What do you guys think?