Posted on

Prince Harry and Meghan would have to apply for Canadian citizenship like everyone else


Following a meeting Monday with Queen Elizabeth II, it’s clear that Prince Harry and Meghan are coming to Canada for “a period of transition.”

What’s not clear is whether the couple intend to continue to divide their time between the two countries after everything has been arranged; whether they will eventually settle permanently in Canada; or, whether they have their sights set on another country, perhaps the United States, where Meghan is reportedly still a citizen. If they did choose to make Canada their permanent, primary home, would they get any special treatment in regards to Canada’s immigration system?

As the grandson of Canada’s monarch and sixth in line to the throne, one might expect Prince Harry to have some special status in this country. But the Duke of Sussex enjoys no such privilege, nor do any of the Queen’s descendants. Even the Queen does not hold Canadian citizenship, although she could reside in Canada for as long as she wants.

“She has a different kind of status but it’s not citizenship. It’s a state authority,” said Carleton University Professor Philippe Lagassé, an expert on the Westminster system. “She’s the personification of the state, so she doesn’t need a passport to enter. She would have all legal rights because everything done by governance is done in her name.”

This special status, however, only applies to the Queen because Canadian law only recognizes the ruling British monarch.

“It’s a very simple rule — whoever’s their monarch is our monarch,” Lagassé said. “We don’t have any provisions in our law for Royals having particular privileges or status. We don’t even have laws that recognize Royals as being Canadian Royals.”

Canada will not automatically grant the royal couple citizenship, and would need to apply to become permanent residents through the normal immigration process, Mathieu Genest, a spokesperson for the immigration minister, told the CBC in a statement. The minister’s office did not respond to the National Post’s request for comment before deadline.

That means Prince Harry will be entering Canada as any other British citizen would, and all British citizens can stay in Canada for up to six months without a visa. It’s the same for U.S. citizens. So Harry and Meghan’s short-term plan could simply be to travel back and forth between Canada and the U.K. at least twice a year — although that would put Meghan’s application for British citizenship at risk.

If the couple wants Canada to be their economic base, visitor visas won’t help them with their long-term goal of becoming financially independent as neither of them would be permitted to work in the country, said Harjit Grewal, an immigration consultant with Sterling Immigration who works in Vancouver and London.

However, it’s entirely possible that Meghan is already a permanent resident in Canada, Grewal said. While she was filming the TV show Suits, Meghan lived in Toronto for nine months of the year for seven years, until she moved to the U.K. to live with Harry in November 2017.

If, during that time, she got a self-employed visa, aimed at people who work in cultural activities or athletics, then she would have been granted permanent residency. That would mean that Meghan is still eligible to live and work — in any field — in Canada, and that she could sponsor Harry and their son Archie.

The couple could also qualify for a business visa, if they chose to invest some of their vast wealth in Canada, Grewal said. He also pointed out that, if Meghan and Harry successfully monetize the Sussex brand, Canada could be eager to fast-track their applications and welcome them as taxpaying citizens.

We don’t have any provisions in our law for Royals having particular privileges or status

Another option is the federal skilled worker (express entry) program, but the couple might not fare too well under that points-based system since Prince Harry doesn’t have a university degree and they are both over 30, Grewal said. Prince Harry is 35 and Meghan is 38.

While the couple have no legal status, in the eyes of many Canadians, there is a cultural connection to the country as members of the Royal family, Lagassé said, but that doesn’t change the law.

“To what extent do you bend the law to accommodate people of fairly significant means?” Lagassé said. “It becomes a political question, not a legal one at that point.”

POPULAR ON NP RIGHT NOW:

‘Celebrities’: Will Prince Harry take over the post of governor general? Canadians are hopeful, poll says

Conservative mom group offended by ‘d-word’ in Burger King commercial. No, not that d-word

Maple Leaf Foods CEO criticizes the ‘narcissist in Washington’ after Iran deaths





Source link

Posted on

American Samoans’ Citizenship Status Still In Limbo After Judge Issues Stay : NPR


John Fitisemanu, an American Samoan, filed the lawsuit against the U.S. government after he was denied the opportunity to apply for federal government jobs listing citizenship as a requirement.

Katrina Keil Youd/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Katrina Keil Youd/AP

John Fitisemanu, an American Samoan, filed the lawsuit against the U.S. government after he was denied the opportunity to apply for federal government jobs listing citizenship as a requirement.

Katrina Keil Youd/AP

John Fitisemanu woke up early Friday morning, got dressed and finally completed one of the tasks on a more than 20-year-old to-do list: He registered to vote.

For less than a day, Fitisemanu, who was born in American Samoa, was legally considered a full-fledged American citizen with voting rights and the ability to run for office or hold certain government jobs. But a judge in a Utah federal court has once again thrown his much longed-for status into question.

After ruling on Thursday that anyone born in American Samoa should be recognized as a U.S. citizen, the same judge — U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups — on Friday decided to put the order on hold until the issue is resolved on appeal.

Since becoming a U.S. territory in 1900, the cluster of Pacific islands southwest of Hawaii has remained the only territory not granted birthright citizenship. Instead, people there are identified as U.S. nationals. That means they are not allowed to participate in federal, state or even local elections in the U.S. They cannot run for any elected office and they’re also denied from applying for government jobs that require citizenship. They’re also issued passports that say, “This bearer is a United States national and not a United States citizen.”

Fitisemanu and two other American Samoans who also live in Utah, sued the federal government to change all that. And Waddoups agreed.

“Any State Department policy that provides that the citizenship provisions of the Constitution do not apply to persons born in American Samoa violates the 14th Amendment,” Waddoups wrote, in a 69-page judgement on Thursday.

The decision contradicts a 2015 ruling in federal court in Washington, D.C., that determined only Congress can resolve questions of citizenship within the nation’s territories. And government attorneys plan to appeal Waddoups’ decision.

Neil Weare, a lawyer for Fitisemanu, Pale Tuli and Rosavita Tuli, said his clients, are eager to have the issue resolved once and for all and “be able to enjoy all the same rights as their fellow Americans.”

In the case of Fitisemanu, who has lived in Utah for more than two decades, Weare said, he’s been a hardworking, taxpaying American. “Yet, based on this discriminatory federal law, he’s been denied recognition of citizenship by the federal government and as a result he’s not able to vote.”

“All he wants is to have his voice be heard, just like any other American would,” Weare added.

In his younger years, Fitisemanu dreamed of landing a government job and all of the security and wages that come with it. “And when he looked in terms of the jobs qualifications, it said, you must be a U.S. citizen. So he was not able to pursue those very attractive, well-paying jobs,” Weare explained.

It was that experience that prompted Fitisemanu, now 56, to file the lawsuit.

Government attorneys dispute the argument that citizenship decisions can be made in federal courts. Their position is that only Congress possesses that power.

“Such a novel holding would be contrary to the decisions of every court of appeals to have considered the question, inconsistent with over a century of historical practice by all three branches of the United States government, and conflict with the strong objection of the local government of American Samoa,” government attorneys wrote.

The government of American Samoa sided with U.S. attorneys, arguing that “imposition of citizenship by judicial fiat would fail to recognize American Samoa’s sovereignty and the importance of the fa’a Samoa [the Samoan way of life].” Additionally, they maintain that an “imposition of citizenship over American Samoan’s objections violates fundamental principles of self-determination.”



Source link