06/25/2026
Another day, another few hundred experts on social mediaā¦..
Somehow having the unpopular opinion that āno one really knows whatās going to happenā really gets under the skin of those completely and utterly convinced they know.
Todayās internet debate is about how the Canadian Citizen Act of 1947 plays into recent conversations about citizenship by descent. When I opined that āno one really knows,ā this was interpreted that I was āon the sideā of those arguing for unlimited citizenship (Im not). But I did like my reply enough to post it here, as I believe the most ethical route includes admitting what one does not knowā¦..
āI am not saying there is an explicit philosophy of jus soli here. I am merely amused at the hundreds of experts all arriving at different conclusions based on their years of experience googling the 1947 and 1914 Acts.
As weāve seen even the lawyers get it wrong. IRCC is clearly divided into factions, and the media doesnāt know who to believe, not that they actually care.
I have no strong opinion either way because there are, indeed, several ways to interpret the statutes as written, the case law behind those statutes, the limited and often conflicting guidance of IRCC and, of course, the contributions of the social media members who are, naturally, the real and reliable experts.
If I were a betting man, Iād wager nothing on any one of these opinions; weāre all going to have to wait until this plays out in the courts and in Parliament.
Those that end up right all along will have been so by chance and circumstance, and likely not because of their expert social media intuition.ā
I refuse to make things up or āguess.ā
Clients have to make the best informed decisions based on the best information actually known at the time. Social media remains an arid desert for the cultivation of best information. š¤£šš¤£š