Borderlines

What happens when IRCC changes the rules after someone has already made major life decisions? Or even submitted their application?We start with recent Post-Graduation Work Permit refusals involving graduates of non-credit programs. Students enrolled in programs that had previously resulted in PGWPs, only for IRCC’s website to be updated in June 2026 to state that non-credit programs, other than flight-school programs, are not eligible. We discuss whether such a change can fairly be applied to people who completed their studies and applied before the website changed, and the broader legal principle against retrospective decision-making.We then look at a similarly confusing issue involving the temporary public policy for Iranian nationals in Canada. IRCC added guidance requiring certain applicants to have continuously remained in Canada, later relaxed that position to permit short absences, yet applicants caught under the earlier interpretation continue to face refusals.The discussion turns to a broader question: where does immigration law actually reside when ministerial public policies, program-delivery instructions, internal guidance and applicant-facing webpages do not necessarily say the same thing? We discuss “soft law,” the rule of law, the legal effect of IRCC guidelines, and the problems created when government webpages can change without a clear record of what they previously said.We also answer viewer questions about:• Whether the Super Visa program could be cancelled• The pause in the Parents and Grandparents Program• Why classmates can receive different PGWP decisions despite apparently identical circumstances• Comprehensive security screening delays• Recent Federal Court decisions on mandamus and security screening• Why internationally trained doctors struggle to become licensed in Canada

Filmmaker Josh Fox joins Borderlines to discuss his new HBO documentary, The Welcome Table, and the growing displacement of people around the world because of climate change.Josh Fox is an Emmy Award-winning and Academy Award-nominated filmmaker best known for Gasland, which helped bring international attention to fracking. In The Welcome Table, he travels through communities affected by fires, floods, drought and other climate disasters to explore what happens when people can no longer safely remain in their homes.The conversation examines the relationship between climate change and migration, the treatment of refugees at borders, and the ways colonialism, economic inequality and the fossil-fuel industry have contributed to the present crisis. Josh also discusses the disproportionate effects of climate displacement on Indigenous peoples, poorer communities and LGBTQ people.The episode considers whether existing refugee and human-rights frameworks are equipped for large-scale climate migration, and what an alternative to walls, detention and exclusion might look like. Josh argues that safety in an increasingly unstable world will depend not only on geography, but on strong communities, democracy, mutual aid and a willingness to welcome others.The Welcome Table is available on HBO Max.

Service Canada has increased the wage thresholds that determine whether an LMIA is classified as high wage or low wage. While the numbers may appear modest, the practical consequences are significant. We explain why many employers in Vancouver and other high-unemployment regions may now be unable to obtain low-wage LMIAs, how the changes affect international graduates on post-graduation work permits, and why these policies are making the path to permanent residence increasingly difficult.We also discuss the new provincial LMIA wage thresholds, how unemployment rates are reshaping Canada's immigration programs, employer inspections, why the LMIA process has become so complex and common mistakes that can derail an LMIA application. We also answer live audience questions about IRCC processing delays, citizenship by descent (Bill C-3) certificate backlogs, officer mistakes in PGWP applications, caregiver processing delays and dual intent in the context of Canadian citizenship who may need a study permit due to processing delays.

Recorded June 24, 2026. IRCC has thrown Canadian citizenship by descent into chaos.After thousands of people received Canadian citizenship certificates under Bill C-3, some were suddenly told to surrender them, only for many to receive follow-up letters days later saying their certificates had been "revalidated." Meanwhile, Immigration Minister Lena Diab has confirmed that new Bill C-3 citizenship applications are not being finalized while IRCC reviews what went wrong.In this episode of Borderlines, we are joined by Amandeep Hayer and Lisa Middlemiss to unpack what happened, what Minister Diab's comments actually mean, and what this uncertainty means for Canadians by descent.We discuss:What prompted IRCC to issue citizenship certificate surrender letters.Why many certificates were later "unsurrendered."Whether affected individuals are still Canadian citizens.The difference between citizenship grants and proof of citizenship.Whether passports, SINs, work authorization, school enrollment, and sponsorships could be affected.Why IRCC's handling of the situation raises serious procedural fairness concerns.Whether these decisions are likely to face judicial review.What applicants should do if they are preparing to submit a Bill C-3 citizenship application.Theories about what may have caused IRCC's sudden reversal.How lawyers are advising clients while applications remain paused.We also answer dozens of live audience questions about urgent processing, historical records, documentary evidence, passports, study permits, pending applications, and what the future may hold for Canada's expanded citizenship by descent regime.If you have been affected by Bill C-3 or are considering applying for proof of Canadian citizenship by descent, this episode provides an in-depth look at one of the most significant developments in Canadian citizenship law this year.

We break down several IRCC e-mail responses to representatives that answer questions by immigration lawyers and consultants.Questions include:Can foreign remote work performed while living in Canada count toward Express Entry?Does someone who applies for a new work permit before their Post-Graduation Work Permit expires have maintained status?In Start-Up Visa applications, do all essential applicants have to pass the R10 completeness check?What happens if an applicant dies while their immigration application is still being processed?We also analyze one of the biggest immigration stories of the FIFA World Cup: Canada's refusal to admit a Ghana national team player. We discuss why the visa was refused, the role of alleged misrepresentation and criminal inadmissibility, Temporary Resident Permits, and why the Federal Court refused to grant an emergency injunction allowing the player to enter Canada.Finally, we answer questions from our live audience, including:Has Canada quietly delayed its target for reducing the temporary resident population?Are Iranian security screening delays likely to improve?What's happening with the Caregiver Program?Should applicants challenge Express Entry refusals involving concurrent foreign work experience?Why are so many immigration files experiencing lengthy processing delays?

Canada's immigration system is becoming increasingly difficult to navigate. Refusal rates are rising, processing is slowing, and pathways that seemed viable just a few years ago are disappearing.In this episode, Steven Meurrens and Deanna Okun-Nachoff discuss the realities facing temporary residents who are running out of options. They explore what happens when work permit applications are refused, why international students are being caught in technical traps, and how applicants should think about the difficult decision of whether to continue fighting to stay in Canada or prepare to leave.The discussion covers:• Canada's immigration slowdown and shrinking pathways to permanent residence• Post-Graduation Work Permit refusals and language test issues• Judicial reviews, reconsideration requests, and restoration applications• The human and financial costs of challenging immigration refusals• How lawyers assess whether a case is worth pursuing• The controversy surrounding so-called "dummy applications" and maintained statusAudience questions answered include: • Can a procedural fairness issue affect an ongoing security screening?• Are interim measure applications finally moving out of the Program Support Unit?• Are words like "support" and "assist" hurting Express Entry work experience claims?• Will IRCC tighten French-language immigration pathways as more applicants learn French for category-based draws?

In this episode of Borderlines, Steven Meurrens and Deanna Okun-Nachoff are joined by immigration lawyer, mediator, and former Canadian Bar Association Chair Kamaljit Lehal to discuss the Supreme Court of Canada’s landmark decision recognizing a new tort of intimate partner violence.We discuss how the Court addressed coercive control, financial abuse, isolation, surveillance, intimidation, and psychological manipulation within intimate relationships, and why the majority concluded that existing legal remedies were insufficient to fully capture the realities of family violence.Topics discussed include the Supreme Court of Canada’s recognition of a new tort of intimate partner violence, coercion and control, the differing views between the majority and dissenting judges, how courts assess damages in family violence cases, trauma-informed approaches in legal proceedings.The decision is Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia.

We break down a major new Federal Court of Appeal decision on criminal inadmissibility, duress, and refugee protection in Canadian immigration law. The case is Rodriguez Anzola v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration).The discussion explores whether individuals convicted abroad can still seek protection in Canada when the underlying criminal conduct occurred under coercion, threats, or fear for their lives. Topics discussed include:how criminal equivalency works in Canadian immigration law;the role of duress in inadmissibility proceedings;the Federal Court of Appeal’s comments on fairness, humanitarian principles, and public safety; growing judicial pushback against overly broad interpretations of inadmissibility law;organized crime, IRGC-related arguments, and security inadmissibility;unusual foreign convictions that have triggered inadmissibility findings in Canada; andbroader concerns about proportionality, plea bargains, and moral culpability in immigration law.The episode also includes audience questions on citizenship by descent, study permits, and the future direction of Canadian immigration policy.

Steven Meurrens and Deanna Okun-Nachoff review several responses from IRCC’s Immigration Representatives’ Mailbox, where immigration representatives ask questions about how Canadian immigration law and various immigration programs are interpreted and appliedTopics discussed include:(1) whether rental assistance counts as social assistance for sponsorships;(2) study permit requirements for children of protected persons;(3) maintained status and “rolling” extension applications;(4) whether marriages count for immigration purposes if the commissionaire is joining remotely;(5) criminal rehabilitation applications and concurrent filings;(6) adding newborn children after COPRs are issued;(7) travelling to Canada by land with an expired PR Card;(8) whether C11 entrepreneur work permits count toward Express Entry;(9) foreign work experience performed remotely from inside Canada;(10) Express Entry NOC code refusals and category-based selection issues;(11) non-accompanying spouses and CRS score maximization;(12) proof of settlement funds in foreign currencies; and(13) PR portal travel complications and eCOPRs. We also answer a live listener question about ATIPs and CBSA. Whether you are an immigration lawyer, consultant, student, or applicant trying to understand how IRCC actually applies the rules in practice, this episode provides a detailed look into the operational side of Canada’s immigration system.