@ISIDEWITHQuestionsimmigrationStarted 8yrs agoActive 9hrs ago

Should immigrants be allowed to hold dual citizenship status?

Should immigrants to Canada be allowed to hold dual citizenship status?

Multiple citizenship, also called dual citizenship is a person's citizenship status, in which a person is concurrently regarded as a citizen of more than one state under the laws of those states. There is no international convention which determines the nationality or citizen status of a person, which is defined exclusively by national laws, which vary and can be inconsistent with each other. Some countries do not permit dual citizenship. Most countries that permit dual citizenship still may not recognize the other citizenship of its nationals within its own territory, for example, in relation to entry into the country, national service, duty to vote, etc.

+
Expand
+ Settings x  

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 512 Ottawa Centre voters.

83%
Yes
17%
No
76%
Yes
15%
No
4%
Yes, unless they have committed a crime
1%
No, and revoke the status for those currently holding dual citizenship
3%
Yes, unless they have committed an act of terrorism
0%
No, and we should not allow any new immigrants into the country at this time
2%
Yes, but they should not be able to claim citizenship status of more than two nations

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 512 Ottawa Centre voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 512 Ottawa Centre voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Ottawa Centre voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @B46V7MRfrom Alberta  answered…4wks4W

No dual citizenship, including Israel. No new immigration. Look to modern effective leaders like Bolsonaro, Orban, Millei, Bukele, Trump, etc. for immigration policies and attitudes towards nationalism.

 @B4ND9T9from British Columbia  answered…1wk1W

Yes, immigrants should be allowed to hold dual citizenship, just as Canadians are allowed to hold dual citizenship with other countries. But the benefits need to weigh against the tax paid to Canada. You can't claim all the benefits without contributing to the workforce and paying taxes for any incomes received.

 @B4MYRBKfrom Ontario  answered…1wk1W

Dual citizenship status should be restricted by country, preventing dual citizens of Canada and high-risk countries

 @B4L49SXfrom Alberta  answered…2wks2W

Yes, and they need to go through an extensive security screening to make sure no terrorisim or crimes have been committed.

 @B4CCRS3from Quebec  answered…3wks3W

No, if they come to this country it's because they want to be Canadian Live like Us learn the language and most importantly the culture. As further religion and their language that should be kept to their home and their Church it's for them to fit in and adopt not for us to adapt to them.

 @B3YW962from Alberta  answered…1mo1MO

No, and we should close the border, and we should deport all illegals, all foreigners in Canada, and all people whose grandparents were not born here.

 @B3Y24R6from Ontario  answered…1mo1MO

Yes, however, to be granted dual-citizenship you should be required to pass an exam, already posses a valid visa, and be living in Canada for a certain period of time before granting dual-citizenship. A dual-citizenship may also be taken away in the event of a felony (small infractions such as traffic incidents don’t count).

 @B3G3R7Sfrom Ontario  answered…2mos2MO

Dual citizenship should be allowed, however, if a crime is committeed or an act of terrorism then no Canadian Citizenship should be granted.

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…5mos5MO

Texas Offers Trump 1,400 Acres for His Mass Deportation Dream

Officials in Texas have offered President-elect Trump a 1,400-acre ranch for his mass deportation plan.Dawn Buckingham, land commissioner of the Texas General Land Office, said in a letter to Trump Tuesday that her office was “fully prepared” to work with federal agencies that are going to be involved in Trump’s immigration plan, and specifically deportation.Buckingham offered Trump a 1,402-acre lot in Starr County. The lot is owned by the Texas General Land Office and is roughly 35 miles west of McAllen, Texas.She said the agency is ready to work with the Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or the U.S. Border Patrol to build a facility on the land for “the processing, detention, and coordination of the largest deportation of violent criminals in the nation’s history.”“I am committed to using every available means at my disposal to gain complete operational security of our border,” Buckingham wrote.The letter and offering of land were first reported by The Texas Tribune. Last month, the state bought the land along the U.S.-Mexico border and has plans to build a wall.In the letter, Buckingham criticized her predecessor for not allowing a border wall to be built on the property. Those actions “enabled cartel members and violent criminals to sexually abuse migrant women and children on this land,” she said.On Monday, Trump signaled he would declare an immigration national emergency and use military assets to support his mass deportation plan when he returns to office.

▲  1625 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3mos3MO

Supreme Court Clears The Way For Trump Sentencing

Donald Trump will face sentencing over his New York “hush money” conviction on Friday, after the US Supreme Court declined to grant him a last-minute reprieve.The decision will force the president-elect to face public proceedings in the criminal case that he has fought strenuously to avoid. His lawyers had appealed to the high court on Wednesday to postpone the proceeding, claiming that allowing it to go ahead days before his inauguration would create a “constitutionally intolerable risk of disruption to national security” and interfere with his efforts to get his 34 felony convictions overturned.In a 5-4 decision handed down just hours before the sentencing was set to go ahead in a state court in lower Manhattan, a majority of the justices declined to do so, saying “the burden that sentencing will impose on the president-elect’s responsibilities is relatively insubstantial” especially as Trump was unlikely to face any prison time. They added that any issues with the evidence presented at trial — some of which Trump’s lawyers have claimed was inadmissible — “can be addressed in the ordinary course on appeal”.Trump-appointed Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined Chief Justice John Roberts and the three liberals on the bench in refusing to grant Trump’s appeal.Trump said in a post on Truth Social that he appreciated the Supreme Court’s time but vowed to continue fighting the case. “For the sake and sanctity of the Presidency, I will be appealing this case, and am confident that JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL,” he said.Lawyers representing Trump did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Trump’s sentencing was repeatedly postponed while he mounted his third campaign for the White House and pursued various appeals against his conviction. Last week Judge Juan Merchan, who oversaw the “hush money” trial in New York earlier this year, finally set a firm date, in order to bring what he called “finality to this matter”.Trump will probably not face any punishment when he is sentenced, however, as the judge previously indicated he would not impose a fine or condemn Trump to prison time.

▲  1619 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…6mos6MO

Chaos in Europe: Germany’s Government Collapses As Trump Returns

Germany’s coalition government collapsed on Wednesday after Chancellor Olaf Scholz sacked his finance minister Christian Lindner, plunging the eurozone’s largest economy into political chaos hours after Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election.Scholz told reporters he would table a confidence vote in parliament on January 15, which most observers expect him to lose. That will pave the way for snap elections in March.Lindner’s sacking and the departure of his pro-business Free Democrats (FDP) from the government brings the curtain down on a deeply unpopular coalition that had become a byword for discord and acrimony.It leaves a void at the heart of Europe just as concern is growing in EU capitals over what a second Trump presidency will mean for transatlantic relations.Germany and the rest of Europe now face a long period of uncertainty they can ill-afford as they brace for a trade war with the US while trying to fend off a growing economic threat from China.In a blistering statement delivered in the chancellery, Scholz blamed Lindner for the breakdown of the government, calling him “selfish” and “irresponsible”. He said he “cared only about his own clientele and the short-term survival of his own party”.The trigger for Lindner’s dismissal was a dispute over next year’s budget. The three coalition partners — Scholz’s Social Democrats (SPD), Lindner’s FDP and the Greens — could not agree on how to plug a €9bn hole in spending plans ahead of a meeting of parliament’s budget committee next week.However, the conflict became overlaid with deeper ideological divisions over how to deal with Germany’s economic downturn and how much public debt the government is legally allowed to raise.Scholz said he had asked Lindner to agree to loosen Germany’s “debt brake”, a cap on new borrowing which is enshrined in the constitution and which the SPD and Greens have long wanted to reform.That would have allowed Germany to take on more debt and so boost its support for Ukraine, at a time when fears are growing Trump might cut aid to Kyiv once installed in the White House.Scholz said he had also proposed capping network charges to bring down energy prices for industrial companies, creating incentives for businesses to invest, and passing a package of measures to safeguard jobs in the car industry, which faces more competition from China.

▲  299 replies

Active 1 day ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…6mos6MO

Trump’s Puerto Rico Problem Erupts in Pennsylvania: Latino Voters Fire Back

Donald Trump has a serious Puerto Rico problem — in Pennsylvania.Many Puerto Rican voters in the state are furious about racist and demeaning comments delivered at a Trump rally. Some say their dismay is giving Kamala Harris a new opening to win over the state’s Latino voters, particularly nearly half a million Pennsylvanians of Puerto Rican descent.Evidence of the backlash was immediate on Monday: A nonpartisan Puerto Rican group drafted a letter urging its members to oppose Trump on election day. Other Puerto Rican voters were lighting up WhatsApp chats with reactions to the vulgar display and raising it in morning conversations at their bodegas. Some are planning to protest Trump’s rally Tuesday in Allentown, a majority-Latino city with one of the largest Puerto Rican populations in the state.And the arena Trump is speaking at is located in the middle of the city’s Puerto Rican neighborhood.“It’s spreading like wildfire through the community,” said Norberto Dominguez, a precinct captain with the local Democratic party in Allentown, who noted his own family is half Republican and half Democratic voters.“It’s not the smartest thing to do, to insult people — a large group of voters here in a swing state — and then go to their home asking for votes,” Dominguez said.The timing couldn’t be worse for Trump. Almost a week before Election Day, he’s pushing to cut into Harris’ margins among Latinos, especially young men who are worried about the economy. But the comments from pro-Trump comedian Tony Hinchcliffe Sunday night, referring to Puerto Rico as a “floating island of garbage,” has reverberated throughout Pennsylvania and elsewhere, prompting even the former president’s Republican allies to defend the island and denounce the comments. And with the race essentially a toss up, every vote counts — especially in Pennsylvania.“This was just like a gift from the gods,” said Victor Martinez, an Allentown resident who owns the Spanish language radio station La Mega, noting some Puerto Rican voters in the area have been on the fence about voting at all.

▲  3117 replies