Ottawa says it will not challenge a court ruling that found a portion of Canada’s Citizenship Act to be unconstitutional.
Immigration Minister Marc Miller said the government “will not appeal the ruling.”
The court ruling came after seven multi-generational Canadian families sued the Canadian government for declining to grant citizenship to their foreign-born offspring due to the country’s “second-generation cut-off rule.” The clock for challenging the ruling officially ran out last week.
Toronto constitutional lawyer Sujit Choudhry, who represented the so-called “Lost Canadians,” living in Canada, Dubai, Hong Kong, Japan, and the United States, said his clients are “feeling vindicated” by both the judge’s ruling and the government’s decision not to challenge it.
Mr. Choudhry, who filed a constitutional challenge to the second-generation cut-off rule in 2021, said it has been a long road to victory.
Amending an Act
Justice Jasmine Akbarali, in a 55-page ruling, said that foreign-born Canadians were given a “lesser class of citizenship” because, unlike Canadian-born citizens, they weren’t permitted to pass their Canadian citizenship on to their children if they were also born abroad.She noted that they also were not automatically able to return to Canada to live with their born-abroad children, a privilege that would never be denied to a Canadian-born parent.
“These families’ experiences highlight the real-life impacts of the unconstitutional second-generation cut-off,” Justice Akbarali wrote. “It is particularly tragic that so much suffering was borne by the children.”
She ordered the federal government to amend the Citizenship Act within six months of her ruling.
Origins of Cut-Off Rule
Canada’s Citizenship Act has been amended many times since its inception in 1947.That all changed in 2009 when Canada had to deal with the costly evacuation of 15,000 Lebanese Canadians who had been stranded in Beirut during Lebanon’s war with Israel.
The second-generation cut-off rule was put in place by the then-Conservative government, which sustained heavy criticism for the $85 million evacuation.
Then-Immigration Minister Diane Finley said the rule was enacted to discourage “Canadians of convenience.”
The legislation, she said, was an easy way to “protect” the value of Canadian citizenship by ensuring all citizens had a “real connection” to the country.
Showing a substantial connection to Canada was no longer enough to achieve citizenship under that new rule. Second-generation children would be treated like any other immigrant and would need parental sponsorship to come to Canada as permanent residents. Only then would the children be able to apply for citizenship.