Staff Writer
As neighbors, Canada’s immigration law is a vital part of understanding the bilateral relationship between the two countries. With proposals to relax security at the U.S.-Canadian border and instead adopt a continental security approach, understanding the differences of how individuals can get into the United States and Canada is a critical topic in Canada-United States relations. This post explores the emotional political debate over whether Canada should adopt a U.S.-styled conditional residency requirement on immigrants who enter Canada by virtue of marrying a Canadian citizen.
The United States imposes a two year conditional residency requirement on individual immigrants who are beneficiaries of an immigrant petition filed by their U.S. citizen spouse. If the couple is married for less than three years, the immigrant spouse receives a conditional resident card when their application for permanent resident status is approved. Ninety days before the second anniversary of the marriage, the couple must file Form I-751 Removal of Conditions. In order to remove the conditions, the couple must submit documentation proving the bona fide nature of the relationship and must show proof of marital union. This is normally done by sending in pictures of the couple together with friends and family, joint accounts, affidavits from the couple, friends and family, etc. However, there are times that the marriage ends before the two year requirement. This makes it difficult for the immigrant spouse to adjust their status. Knowing that they would immediately be placed in removal proceedings, many immigrant spouses stay in a broken marriage. In worst case scenarios, these immigrants put up with physical and emotional abuse in order to receive their permanent resident status.
Canada’s Minister of Citizenship and Immigration has proposed a policy to create a two year “conditional residency” similar to the U.S.[1] The proposal would amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations to include a specified period of conditional permanent residence for spouses and partners sponsored by Canadian citizens/permanent residents. Unlike the U.S., this policy would only apply to spouses and partners who have been married to their sponsor for two years or less at the time of the sponsorship application.[2] The sponsored spouse or partner would be required to remain in a bona fide relationship with their sponsor for a period of two years after receiving Canadian permanent residence status or risk losing their status.
This proposal has created serious concerns about the vulnerability of spouses and partners in abusive relationships. Canada’s Immigration Legal Committee (ILC) is opposed to the proposed changes. Among other objections, the ILC believes that the new policy would place the immigrant spouse, who usually are women, in increasingly vulnerable situations such as abusive relationships. They also believe that there are enough measures in place to prevent and identify marriage fraud.
A report done by Status of Women Canada shows that this is a legitimate concern. The report entitled, “Sponsorship…For Better or For Worse,”[3] states that “although not all sponsored women are negatively affected by the legal relationship, […] often sponsorship seems to be a source of conflict, tension, blackmail and at times abuse.”[4] The proposed changes may very well force women sponsored by Canadian spouses to remain in an abusive relationship for fear of losing her permanent resident status. However, the Minister has stated that “a process for allowing bona fide spouses and partners in such situations to come forward without facing enforcement action would be developed if a conditional permanent residence period were introduced.”[5] It will be interesting to see if this policy works for Canada as well as it works (or doesn’t work) for the U.S.
[1] The proposals were published in the Canada Gazette. See Canada Gazette, Government Notices (2011), available at http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2011/2011-03-26/html/notice-avis-eng.html#d114 (last visited Sept. 24, 2011).
[2] This is one year less than is required in the United States.
[3] ANDREE COTE, et al., SPONSORSHIP. . . FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE (2001), http://dsp-psd.tpsgc.gc.ca/Collection/SW21-54-2000E.pdf.
[4] Id.
[5] Jim Bronskill, Feds Propose New Rules For Sponsored Spouses, March 28, 2011, http://news.ca.msn.com/canada/cp-article.aspx?cp-documentid=28166829.
No comments:
Post a Comment