www.wilsoncenter.org Open in urlscan Pro
151.101.2.216  Public Scan

Form analysis
2 forms found in the DOM

GET /search

<form class="flyout-menu-search" action="/search" method="get"><label class="sr-text" for="site-search">Search</label><input type="search" name="keywords" id="site-search" placeholder="Search by keyword..." required=""><button type="submit"><span
      class="sr-text">Search</span></button></form>

https://engage.wilsoncenter.org/onlineactions/WpUYj9S_MkydZEXxsyWeYw2

<form class="site-footer-signup-form" action="https://engage.wilsoncenter.org/onlineactions/WpUYj9S_MkydZEXxsyWeYw2">
  <div class="site-footer-signup-form-field"><label class="sr-text" for="email-address">Email Address</label><input type="email" name="em" id="email-address" placeholder="Your email address..." required=""></div><button type="submit"
    name="submit">Submit</button>
</form>

Text Content

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.
View our privacy policy.

Accept
Skip to main content
Close
SearchSearch
 * TopicsOpen/Close
   * Featured Topics
     * Refugees and Forced Displacement
     * Hindsight Up Front | Ukraine
     * WQ Spring Issue
     * Climate & Migration
     * Strategic Competition
     * Women's History Month
     * Critical Minerals
   * Cold War
   * Democracy
   * Digital Assets
   * Economics and Globalization
   * Energy
   * Environment
   * Global Governance
   * Governance
   * History
   * International Development
   * Maternal Health
   * Migration
   * Security and Defense
   * U.S. Foreign Policy
   * Women & Gender
 * RegionsOpen/Close
   * Arctic/Antarctic
   * Africa
   * Asia
   * Europe
   * Latin America
   * Middle East and North Africa
   * North America
   * Russia and Eurasia
 * ProgramsOpen/Close
   * Africa Program
   * Asia Program
     * Hyundai Motor-Korea Foundation Center for Korean History and Public
       Policy
   * Canada Institute
   * Congressional Relations
   * Environmental Change and Security Program
   * Global Europe Program
   * History and Public Policy Program
     * Cold War International History Project
     * North Korea International Documentation Project
     * Nuclear Proliferation International History Project
   * Kennan Institute
   * Kissinger Institute on China and the United States
     * China Environment Forum
   * Latin American Program
     * Argentina Project
     * Brazil Institute
   * Maternal Health Initiative
   * Mexico Institute
   * Middle East Program
     * The Islamists
     * Middle East Women's Initiative
     * The Middle East and North Africa Workforce Development Initiative
   * Polar Institute
   * Refugee and Forced Displacement Initiative
   * Science and Technology Innovation Program
     * Serious Games Initiative
   * Wahba Institute for Strategic Competition

 * Events
 * Experts
 * Watch & Listen
 * Insight & Analysis
 * Press Room
 * About the Wilson Center
 * Careers, Fellowships, and InternshipsOpen/Close
   * Jobs
   * China Fellowship
   * Wilson Center Fellowship
   * Foreign Policy Fellowship
   * Congressional Technology Labs
   * Internships
 * Support the Wilson CenterOpen/Close
   * 2020 Donors
   * 2021 Donors

 * Alumni Network
 * Diversity & Inclusion
 * The Wilson Quarterly
 * Digital Archive

Support
 * Topics
   
   FEATURED TOPICS
   
    * Refugees and Forced Displacement
    * Hindsight Up Front | Ukraine
    * WQ Spring Issue
    * Climate & Migration
    * Strategic Competition
    * Women's History Month
    * Critical Minerals
   
    * Cold War
    * Democracy
    * Digital Assets
    * Economics and Globalization
    * Energy
    * Environment
    * Global Governance
    * Governance
    * History
    * International Development
    * Maternal Health
    * Migration
    * Security and Defense
    * U.S. Foreign Policy
    * Women & Gender

 * Regions
    * Arctic/Antarctic
    * Africa
    * Asia
    * Europe
    * Latin America
    * Middle East and North Africa
    * North America
    * Russia and Eurasia

 * Programs
    * Africa Program
    * Asia Program
      * Hyundai Motor-Korea Foundation Center for Korean History and Public
        Policy
    * Canada Institute
    * Congressional Relations
    * Environmental Change and Security Program
    * Global Europe Program
    * History and Public Policy Program
      * Cold War International History Project
      * North Korea International Documentation Project
      * Nuclear Proliferation International History Project
    * Kennan Institute
    * Kissinger Institute on China and the United States
      * China Environment Forum
    * Latin American Program
      * Argentina Project
      * Brazil Institute
    * Maternal Health Initiative
    * Mexico Institute
    * Middle East Program
      * The Islamists
      * Middle East Women's Initiative
      * The Middle East and North Africa Workforce Development Initiative
    * Polar Institute
    * Refugee and Forced Displacement Initiative
    * Science and Technology Innovation Program
      * Serious Games Initiative
    * Wahba Institute for Strategic Competition

 * Events
 * Experts
 * Watch & Listen
 * Press Room

SupportMenu
 1. Home
 2. Insight & Analysis

Explore More
Close
Article
Migration
Canada and the United States: Heading in Different Directions on Immigration?
By Richard Sanders on July 9, 2020
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare via Email
SharePrint
Share
ShareClose
Copy LinkFacebookTwitterLinkedInEmail
Part of the On The Northern Frontier
Article


A LAYERED LOOK AT CANADIAN AND U.S. IMMIGRATION

By Richard Sanders on July 21, 2020
Canada Institute
MigrationCanadaUnited States
Image Credit

Unsplash

Geography favors Canada. Three borders are with the vast Atlantic, Pacific, and
Arctic Oceans, and the fourth is with the United States, a country with a
comparable level of development.  The United States, however, has a 2000
mile-long border with Mexico, which has a per capita GDP one sixth of that of
the United States.  Mexico also is a transit corridor for immigrants from third
countries to the United States, not only third countries in Latin America, but
also Asia, Africa, and the Middle East.

FAMILY REUNIFICATION THE “BEDROCK” OF U.S. IMMIGRATION; CANADA PRIVILEGES
ECONOMIC BENEFIT

Both the United States and Canada allow immigration both for family
reunification and to meet the countries’ economic needs.  However, Canada’s
approach to the former is more restrictive.  It allows citizens and permanent
residents to sponsor spouses or common law partners, dependent children,
parents, and grandparents.  One may sponsor brothers, sisters, nephews, nieces,
or grandchildren only if they are orphaned. None of these programs has a
numerical cap. [1]

By contrast, the American approach to family reunification, which one supportive
organization has termed “the bedrock of U.S. immigration policy,”[2] is much
more expansive.  Immediate relatives (spouses, minor children, adopted orphans,
and parents) of U.S. citizens are admissible without any numerical ceilings. 
But a broad range of other relations are allowed in, subject to caps, in the
different categories through a cascading system of preferences for, first,
unmarried adult children of U.S. citizens, followed in turn by spouses and
unmarried children of U.S. permanent residents, married sons and daughters of
U.S. citizens, and brothers and sisters of adult U.S. citizens.  No single
country can account for more than seven percent of admissions.

Canada’s immigration system looks more welcoming, but it is economic-based. In
2017, Canada admitted immigrants under its family category at a rate of 0.23
percent per capita, a surprisingly equal rate to that of the United States. But
in Canada, the family category only accounted for 28 percent of legal immigrants
admitted that year, while 57 percent of its legal immigrants fell under the
economic category (family included).[3] The United States, admitted legal
immigrants under its family category at the same rate of 0.23 percent per capita
which accounted for 68% of U.S. legal immigration that year.[4] Per capita,
Canada welcomed the same amount of immigrants under its family category and 12
times more legal immigrants under its economic category as the United States
that year.[5]

In Canada, admission as an economic immigrant is based on a points system, in
which the more points that are earned, the better one’s chances are of being
allowed to enter.  Different categories exist—skilled worker, skilled trades,
and “Canadian Experience,” (a mechanism for temporary foreign workers and
foreign graduates of Canadian universities to convert to permanent resident
status).  Economic immigrants may bring their immediate families with them into
Canada.  Factors that affect points include age, education level, English or
French language proficiency, work experience, and the presence of family in
Canada.  A job offer is one, but by no means the only or most important factor. 
There is an “express entry” program for employment categories that are in
particular demand.

The American program for economic immigration is much more limited. While
special visas exist for temporary workers (intra-company transfers, agricultural
workers, etc.), permanent economic immigration is subject to a cap of 140,000
entrants per year (including family members).[6]  These are divided among
different categories, such as “persons of extraordinary ability,” persons with
advanced degrees, and skilled workers.[7]

UNAUTHORIZED IMMIGRATION:  BIG ISSUE FOR THE UNITED STATES, NOT SO MUCH FOR
CANADA

In general, Canada appears to have a much more liberal immigration policy than
the United States. In 2019, with 11 percent of the United States’ population,
Canada receives 32 percent of the number of legal immigrants that of the United
States receives.[8] However, the United States, unlike Canada, has an estimated
12 million unauthorized immigrants, with the number of entrants in recent years
varying from as low as 70,000 per year to a high of 470,000.[9]

While Canada does not appear to keep comparable statistics, its problem appears
to be much smaller, though not trivial. Canada maintains tight border
restrictions on who comes in on temporary visas to reduce the risk of potential
irregular immigrants entering Canada on such visas.[10] Between 2012 and 2017,
temporary travel refusals climbed from 18 percent to 26 percent, and in the
first quarter of 2018, hit 30 percent.[11]   The relatively small scale of
irregular immigration to Canada also may be seen by the number of irregular
border crossers (people crossing the border between immigration posts) making
claims for refugee status.  Between 2017 and 2019, a total of 54,739 persons
made such claims, of which 12,255 were accepted, 10,627 rejected, and the
remainder withdrawn, abandoned, or pending.[12]

Again, Canada is not immune from irregular entry. Relatively recent events in
the United States led to a surge in irregular border crossings into Canada.
After President Trump announced in 2017 his intention to end Temporary Protected
Status for unauthorized immigrants from several countries, there was a spike in
such crossings, especially by Haitians, who sought refugee status after entering
Canada.[13] The crisis eased after U.S. courts struck down President Trump’s
order and Temporary Protected Status for persons originating from those
countries has been renewed through 2021 while appeals in the courts continue. 
During COVID-19, Canada and the United States have tightened their policies;
between United States and Canada, refugee claimants entering at unofficial ports
of entry will be returned to the country they first stepped into,  rather than
being allowed to stay in the second country while their claims are adjudicated.
The United States has indicated that it is its intention to return these persons
to their countries of origin where possible, raising the question in Canada of
whether the United States is a “safe third country” to which Canada can engage
in deportation (“refoulement”) under its international obligations.

REFUGEES:  HEADING IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS

Both the United States and Canada are signatories of relevant United Nations
conventions allowing persons to enter a country from abroad claiming refugee
status and have systems for adjudicating claims for refugee status or asylum. 
(Refugees are seeking to enter a country on the basis of a “well-founded fear of
persecution” for a specific ground of race, religion, nationality, political
opinion, or membership in a specific social group. In contrast, asylum seekers
either present themselves at a port of entry or enter the proposed country of
refuge, either unauthorized or on another status, e.g., with a tourist visa.) 

Although the two countries thus have similar criteria for asylum and refugee
statuses, implementation has diverged, as the Trump administration has taken an
increasingly hard line.  While U.S. law gives immigration officials discretion
over whether or not to detain asylum seekers as opposed to letting them enter
and subsequently appear for their hearing, detention has become increasingly the
preferred solution, especially in response to pressures at the border with
Mexico.  The detention of unaccompanied minors has become a major political and
legal issue.  Although detention of asylum seekers is provided for under
Canadian law, the criteria for its use appear to be tighter.  Detention of minor
children is considered to be a “last resort” option under governing
regulations.  Detention is largely reserved for the relatively few who enter as
“irregular arrivals,” i.e., not presenting themselves at a port of entry, or for
potential security risks.  Canada had 6251 immigration detainees in 2017
compared with 323,591 held by the United States that same year.[14] The United
States has more than one million asylum seekers awaiting adjudication of their
claims.[15]  In 1919, the United States implemented a “remain in Mexico” policy
under which non-Mexican asylum seekers would not be allowed into the United
States until after they were granted asylum.

The United States imposes fixed ceilings on the number of refugee admissions,
which have been progressively lowered by the Trump administration, from 50,000
for 2017, (slashed from the 85,000 level for 2016 set by the Obama
administration) to 45,000 for 2018, 30,000 for 2019, and most recently 18,000
for 2020.[16] As a result, refugee admissions for the United States are now
dipping below those of Canada, which does not set formal refugee caps, but
instead has softer “targets” with high and low ranges.  Canada’s refugee
admission target for 2020 is 31,700.[17]  Canada’s refugee admission levels have
been generally on an upward trend since 2014, although they are below a spike
seen in 2016 when a program of admission for Syrian refugees existed. 

IMMIGRATION AFTER COVID-19

What has been the impact of the COVID-19 crisis been on American and Canadian
Immigration?   Immigration to Canada has obviously been affected by the decrease
in flights and the closure of the U.S. border to most traffic.  However, those
seeking to immigrate with applications approved prior to March 18 will be
processed if they are able to arrive.[18]  Extensions will be given to those
whose documents expire before they are able to travel.  Refugee processing will
be “temporarily paused” and any refugee claimant seeking to enter from the
United States will be returned.[19]  The United States has taken a more
categorical approach.  The entry of economic-based immigrants has been suspended
for sixty days (renewable) because of the “impact of foreign workers on the
United States labor market, particularly in an environment of high domestic
unemployment and depressed demand for labor.”[20]  Exceptions are made for
certain categories such as health and agricultural workers. Using authorities
under public health laws, the removal of asylum-seekers from the United States
has been expedited.[21]

As for the longer term, in the United States, it is reasonable to expect that
President Trump will maintain COVID-19-based measures to further tighten
immigration through to the end of his present term, and beyond.  What a
President Biden would do is unclear. (Unless extended, the newest
executive-ordered immigration freeze will end before the next presidential term
begins.)  Biden has sought to distance himself from some of the tougher border
enforcement policies of the Obama administration and promised to send an
immigration proposal to Congress on his first day in office.[22]

In Canada, questions are arising as to the viability of current immigration
targets, which are programmed for 341,000 in 2020, 351,000 in 2021, and 361,000
for 2022.[23]  Immigration Minister Mendocino was pointedly asked in a
Parliamentary Question from the opposition if in light of the lingering economic
impact Canada can, “accommodate added to our population in the foreseeable
future an additional one percent of immigrants and refugees.”[24]  While he
declined to say whether or not the targets would be changed, he stressed that
immigration was an “enduring value” for Canadians and that immigrant labor would
play an important role in Canada’s economic recovery.[25]  Thus, it appears that
while Canada will likely escape the acrimony that has characterized the
immigration debate in the United States, the new environment of COVID-19 is
moving immigration further into the foreground of its political life.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, “Family Sponsorship,”
Government of Canada, (June 2020).

[2] Philip E. Wolgin, “Family Unification is the Bedrock of U.S. Immigration
Policy,” Center for American Progress, (February 12, 2018).

[3] David Bier, “Canada Will Up Immigration to 1% of its Population, 2.6 Times
the U.S. Rate,” CATO Institute, (November 2018).

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

[6] American Immigration Council, “How the American Immigration System Works,”
(October 10, 2019).

[7] Ibid.

[8] Homeland Security, “Legal Immigration and Adjustment of Status Report Fiscal
Year 2019, Quarter 4,” (March 2020).

Canada Visa, “Canada's Multi-Year Immigration Plan 2018 to 2021,” (June 2020).

[9] Office of Immigration Statistics, “Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant
Population Residing in the United States: January 2015,” Department of Homeland
Security, (January 2018).

[10] Geoffrey York and Michelle Carbert, “Access denied: Canada’s refusal rate
for visitor visas soars,” The Globe and Mail, (July 2018).

[11] Ibid.

[12] Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, “Irregular Border Crossers
Statistics,” (May 2020).

[13] Susan Ormiston, “How Thousands of Asylum Seekers have Turned Roxham Road
into a De Facto Border Crossing,” CBC News, (September 29, 2019).

[14] Global Detention Project, “Canada Immigration Detention,” (June 2020), and

Global Detention Project, “United States Immigration Detention,” (June 2020).

[15] Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, “Refugee Admissions,” U.S.
Department of State, (June 2020).

[16] Migration Policy Institute “U.S. Annual Refugee Resettlement Ceilings and
Number of Refugees Admitted, 1980-Present,” (June 2020).

The White House, “Presidential Determination on Refugee Admissions for Fiscal
2020,” (November 1, 2019).

[17] Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, “Notice—Supplementary
Information 2019-2021 Immigration Levels Plan,” Government of Canada (October
2018).

[18] Government of Canada, “Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Immigration
applicants,” (June 22, 2020).

[19] Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, “Coronavirus disease
(COVID-19): Refugees, asylum claimants, sponsors and PRRA applicants,” (May 14,
2020).

[20] The White House, “Proclamation Suspending Entry of Immigrants who Present
Risk to the U.S. Labor Market During the Economic Recovery Following the
COVID-19 Outbreak,” (April 22, 2020).

[21] Yael Schacher and Chris Beyrer, “Expelling Asylum-Seekers is not the
Answer: U.S. Border Policy in the Time of COVID-19,” Refugees International,
(April 27, 2020).

[22]Jenna Johnson, “Joe Biden Fights Skepticism with a Simple Immigration
Message:  I’m not Trump or Obama,” The Washington Post, (May 19, 2020).

[23] Canada Visa, “Canada's Multi-Year Immigration Plan 2018 to 2021,” (June
2020).

[24] The Canadian Press, “Immigration will be Key in Post-Pandemic Era:  Liberal
Minister Mendocino,” The National Post, (May 15, 2020).

[25] The Canadian Press, “Immigration will be Key in Post-Pandemic Era:  Liberal
Minister Mendocino,” The National Post, (May 15, 2020).


ABOUT THE AUTHOR

RICHARD SANDERS

Global Fellow;
Former member of the Senior Foreign Service of the U.S. Department of State
Read More

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


CANADA INSTITUTE

Bound by common geopolitical interests and strong economic and cultural ties,
Canada and the United States enjoy the world's most successful bilateral
relationship. The Wilson Center's Canada Institute is the only public policy
forum in the world dedicated to the full spectrum of Canada-U.S. issues. The
Canada Institute is a global leader for policymakers, academics and business
leaders to engage in non-partisan, informed dialogue about the current and
future state of the relationship.     Read more




EXPLORE MORE

Browse Insights & Analysis
PreviousNext
Blog post
Civil Society
Сделано в России. Или нет
By Roman Super on April 20, 2023
Blog post
Migration
Canada: Ageing Workforce, Boosting Immigration
By Ambassador Mark A. Green on April 18, 2023
Article
Migration
Shaken to The Core: The Plight of Syrian Refugees After February’s Earthquake
By Muhammad Tahir on April 11, 2023
New Security Beat
Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding
Pushing Back the Pushback: Addressing the Complexities of Gender and Migration
Blog post
Migration
Песни изгнания
By Lev Gankin on March 20, 2023
Article
Migration
Protracted Confinement: Historical Perspective on Refugee Aid
By Laura Robson on March 17, 2023
Audio
Global Alliances & Partnerships
Canusa Street Episode 63: Van-Gran Jam with Taleeb Noormohamed
Blog post
Migration
Брызги
By Roman Shtyl-Bitynsh on March 6, 2023
Article
Security and Defense
Briefing on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Countering Illicit Fentanyl
Trafficking Hearing
By Katie Cooper on February 24, 2023
Video
Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding
One Year Later: Ukrainian MP Kira Rudik Shares Stories of Resilience
Blog post
Migration
Полторы комнаты
By Roman Super on February 22, 2023

One Woodrow Wilson Plaza
1300 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20004-3027

Visit the Wilson Center
Phone:
(202) 691-4000
Contact Us
 * About the Wilson Center
 * Programs
 * Careers, Fellowships & Internships
 * For Media
 * The Wilson Quarterly
 * Digital Archive

Follow the Wilson Center
 * Twitter
 * Facebook
 * YouTube
 * LinkedIn
 * Instagram
 * Flickr

Sign up for email updates
Email Address
Submit
© 2023 The Wilson Center. All Rights Reserved
 * 2021 Donors
 * 990 Forms
 * Privacy Policy


Close

Close
Share
 * 
 *