ºÃÉ«tv

In 2009, the Conservative federal government changed the law so that ºÃÉ«tvs who were born abroad could not pass down their citizenship unless their child was born in Canada.

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice ruled in late 2023 that the law was unconstitutional and the government agreed with the ruling.

Since that ruling, the government has received three extensions to the deadline to pass legislation extending citizenship to those affected by the law.

In a media statement, Miller said the government applied to the court for a 12-month extension to the current March 19 deadline. 

During this delay, Miller said his department will offer "discretionary" citizenship grants for affected people who were born or adopted before Dec. 19, 2023 — the date of the original Ontario court ruling.

Potential "lost ºÃÉ«tvs" born or adopted after that date who have a citizen parent who has spent at least three cumulative years in Canada are also eligible for citizenship under the interim rules.

That three-year rule was part of the "lost ºÃÉ«tvs" legislation that died on the order paper when Parliament was prorogued in January. It was meant to create a consistent citizenship mechanism for people born abroad beyond the first generation.

In a decision released March 13, judge Jasmine Akbarali said she was prepared to give the government "some additional time" to provide evidence of how it would mitigate the impact of the unconstitutional legislation, temporarily extending the deadline until April 25.

"There is no evidence of what policy will be adopted to implement its intention," the judge said. "There is no evidence about how any such policy will be communicated to people affected by the unconstitutional legislation."

"There is nothing to allow me to evaluate how effective the expanded interim measures will be in attenuating the impact of the ongoing rights violations that the respondent proposes."

Akbarali said more information was needed to determine whether a further suspension should be granted and how long it should be. 

Sujit Choudhry, a lawyer representing people who challenged the law, wrote in a court submission that the court should only give the federal government a four-month extension on the deadline.

He argued that the "only plausible" reason for requesting a 12-month extension is the likelihood of a federal election in the very near term.

Choudhry wrote that courts have granted four-month extensions in the past to pass court-mandated legislation during election campaigns, and the same thing should be done in this instance.

In its court submission, the federal government argues that if the deadline lapses without legislation in place, it would mean some people would automatically become ºÃÉ«tv citizens while others would be "excluded" from citizenship.

The court heard these arguments Thursday morning. A decision is expected soon.

This report by ºÃÉ«tvwas first published March 13, 2025.