u/Mountainexplorer92

With Bill C-3, people with Canadian ancestry are automatically citizens by birth if they were born before the law went into effect. But I keep going back and forth on how this actually works in practice because of two conflicting arguments:  

 Argument 1: You are already a citizen retroactive to the moment you're born; the application process for a certificate is literally just requesting proof of a status that already exists.  

 Argument 2: Until IRCC actually vets your lineage, reviews the records, and verifies it, you aren't a legal citizen yet.

I wonder which one it really is. I see so many on these groups say “we are already citizens. We are just requesting proof” which is arguably true — but that leads me to a crazy hypothetical I think about way too often lol:

Let's say someone works for the CIA or the FBI, or any other federal occupation with high security clearance that forbids any and all dual citizenship. Let’s say they happen to have a Canadian great-grandparent or great-great-grandparent or even further removed Canadian ancestor, making them technically eligible under Bill C-3. Hillary Clinton is actually an example of someone who held high ranking clearance and had Canadian ancestry.

However, for this hypothetical let’s say the person has zero intention of ever submitting a proof of citizenship application or interacting with IRCC. In some cases they may not even know any of this

We all know some occupations strictly forbid people from holding dual citizenship. But under this new law... do they actually hold it anyway regardless if they want it or not? Ethically, as they advance in their career should they report that they hold this citizenship?

If citizenship by descent is truly automatic and retroactive from birth, do they technically possess a foreign citizenship right now, even if they've never claimed it or gotten a piece of paper for it? And if security investigators view "automatic birthright" as a disqualifying dual citizenship, how on earth are you supposed to handle a foreign allegiance you never asked for, never documented, and refuse to claim? would people in this category be forced to apply — Only so they could renounce? lol

Where this gets even more complex in my head. Let’s say someone in this category, with high security clearance, has kids that want to make a claim based off a distant ancestor. Obviously the kids would not include an application for their parents with high security clearance, but still need their parent’s birth record — who knows if that logs the parent with security clearance in IRCC’s system as a citizen regardless?

Curious how others view this grey area. Does citizenship exist independently of state recognition, or does it only spark into existence once the bureaucracy finishes vetting you? Interesting hypothetical thought I have had for some time

I’m starting this thread to collect data on whether recent applications referred to PSU show any pattern involving pre-Confederation ancestors as this is a larger question in our C-3 community.

During the interim measures last year, almost everyone beyond the first generation seemed to get sent to PSU, and some are still stuck there. After Bill C-3 passed, PSU referrals appeared to drop significantly and applications started moving more normally including applications with pre-confederation G0’s. That was until the surrender letters in June. That felt like a clear turning point. The main public message from IRCC at the time was about tightening documentary standards. Many of us wondered if anything else would come out of it beyond that, as there were a lot of inconsistencies with it (and still are).

Last week we learned that an adoption applicant received an email from an IRCC officer stating they are still holding any file where the G0 was born prior to Confederation. While that was an adoption case, it raises concerns for regular descent claims too. Adoption grants and regular certificates of citizenship operate under the same statutory framework when determining whether the anchor ancestor was a Canadian citizen capable of passing citizenship down. The main difference is the final document issued.

We’ve also seen a broader slowdown/pause on most C-3 applications since June. Movement has only just started to pick up again in the last week or so, but (to my knowledge) we have not yet seen a clear post-pause approval of an application with a pre-Confederation G0.

The legal question being raised

The core issue some are discussing is how “Canada” is interpreted in the Citizenship Act for someone born before July 1, 1867, and that if IRCC is looking into this, this is likely what they could be looking into in regard to confederation. Was that ancestor “born in Canada” for the purposes of the Citizenship Act, or born in British North America? A narrow interpretation of the statute could limit the statutory pathways that allow an ancestor to be deemed a Canadian citizen retroactively and able to pass citizenship under C-3 if they are born before July 1, 1867

There are complications with this idea, though. Newfoundland did not join until 1949 and has its own conversion provisions (including s. 3(1.01)). A strict 1867 line would create different treatment for Newfoundland lines, which is one of the reasons this remains messy.

Recent examples that have come up that raise this PSU question

•  Today someone posted in the Facebook group that they received their ATIP notes showing a mid-July referral to PSU. They are G4, requested urgency, and their anchor ancestor was born in 1867 **but before Confederation**

•  Last week on this sub, a G4 applicant reported receiving an email that their file is being referred to PSU. They were also urgent and stated their ancestor was **born in 1862.** They also had an uncertified baptismal record for their G0, but being sent to PSU for that seems extreme, especially given what we know now for documentary standards. If that were the issue I think it’s far more likely IRCC would just send an email for the correct document and give 60 days as they are known to do. They did it this way last week to a person with a G0 born in 1878 requesting she get a Quebec Birth Certificate from DEC.

•  Also last week, another applicant in this sub with an ancestor born in the 1890s in Newfoundland reported being sent to PSU. This one is particularly interesting because of Newfoundland’s separate 1949 provisions for when they joined confederation. If IRCC is examining the larger statutory question around this, Newfoundland is an area where they would need to exercise caution for anything before 1949 until the question is fully settled. Also appears this person requested urgency

Before anyone comes at me, I’m not claiming a formal policy cutoff exists right now. I’m simply trying to gather more data to prove it or disprove if there is a correlation. We don’t have a large sample yet, and it’s possible these are isolated cases or driven by other factors. But if a pattern continues to appear between recent PSU referrals and pre-Confederation (or very early) G0s, it would be useful for the community to see it.

**If you have a recent PSU referral (especially post-June), please share what you can:**

•  Generation (G2, G3, G4, etc.)

•  Approximate birth year / location of the G0 ancestor

•  Rough timing of the PSU referral

•  Any other notable details (urgency request, etc.)

The goal is just to see whether any correlation is emerging.

**If you have a pre-confederation ancestor, are in-processing, and you requested your notes and you are NOT in PSU. Please share that data as well as it helps disprove this possible correlation**

Also if the data reveals there is a correlation. I don’t think that necessarily means that these applications won’t be approved eventually. I just think it highlights that the department is stuck on making sure they are being processed correctly under the statute.

I find it strange there isn’t more nudism in the Adirondacks. Like you would think there’d be a designated nude beach or nude area given how much people come to this area to be one with nature. I think it’d be popular.