The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
New Globe and Mail Article on How and Why Canada Should Open its Doors to More Ukrainian and Russian Refugees
I coauthored it with Canadian immigration policy expert Sabine El-Chidiac.

The Globe and Mail, one of Canada's leading papers, just published my op ed (coauthored with Canadian immigration policy expert Sabine El-Chidiac of the Institute for Liberal Studies) on how Canada can "do good and do well" by opening its doors more widely to Ukrainian and Russian refugees. As we note, Canada's policy in this field has been significantly better than that of the United States. But it, too, can do more:
Russian President Vladimir Putin's war of aggression against Ukraine has forced more than 4.5 million people to flee that country, in one of the largest refugee crises since the Second World War. At the same time, many thousands of Russians are also trying to flee Mr. Putin's increasing oppression, which has included a near-total shutdown of independent media and new laws that criminalize calling the conflict in Ukraine a war or invasion.
So Canada and other Western nations have moral and pragmatic reasons to do more to open their doors to Ukrainian and Russian migrants alike….
The moral case is obvious: it is wrong to turn away people facing indiscriminate bombing and shelling, and – in some areas – the prospect of prolonged occupation by Russian forces. Canada has a long, if imperfect, history of welcoming refugees escaping oppression and war, including Russians, Hungarians and others fleeing Soviet communism. Today's Ukrainian and Russian refugees are no less worthy of consideration….
Canada's government has already taken important steps to welcome Ukrainian refugees, such as allowing them to stay in the country for up to three years (which can potentially be extended), and offering work permits. More recently, Ottawa announced additional measures for those coming through this temporary program including targeted charter flights, short-term income support and temporary hotel accommodations for up to two weeks. But while Canadian policy on Ukrainian refugees is ahead of that of the United States in many respects, more can be done, including making legal residency status and work permits permanent, creating a distinct pathway to permanent residency for Ukrainians who wish to stay here permanently and offering the full slate of services extended to refugees….
Canada should also facilitate a rapid expansion of private-sponsorship Ukrainian refugee programs….
While Canada and other countries have done much to help Ukrainian migrants, virtually nothing has been done to assist the many thousands of Russians fleeing Vladimir Putin's ever-accelerating repression. This neglect is both unjust and strategically short-sighted.
Indeed, opening Western doors to Russian migrants would also help secure victory for liberal democracy in the "war of ideas" against Mr. Putin's authoritarian nationalism and can "drain Putin's brain" by denying him the skilled labour he needs for his war machine. It would be a powerful signal of liberalism's superiority over Putinism, and a counter to Kremlin propaganda to the effect that Western nations are enemies of the Russian people, not just the regime. During the Cold War, Canada and the U.S. welcomed refugees from communism in part for this very reason.
I made a similar case regarding US and European Union policy in my March 8 New York Times article on this topic. In that article, I addressed a number of counterarguments we could not cover in the Globe and Mail piece, because of the latter's tighter word limits. For example, I responded to claims that accepting Russians and Ukrainians would create espionage and security risks, and that doing so would be unjust because the US and other Western nations have been less open to refugees from other conflicts and oppressive regimes.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
It seems that Stalinism is not tied to Communism. Putin is a religious orthodox man. It is tied to Russian culture. We do not want people of that culture coming here, with their absolute lack of any morals whatsoever.
TBH I wouldn't mind more hot middleclass and rich Ukranian and Russian girls coming over here to balance out the hordes of destitute pouring over our borders. But unfortunately I get the feeling they are going to use this to let in 'ukrainians' from other countries.
Per Capita GDP:
Honduras 5100
El Salvador 8100
Guatemala 8400
Ukraine 12400
Mexico 17900
Russia 26000
United States 60200
None of them are even close to middle class here, I mean other than the top 1-5% or so.
But it's long been my contention that we should be issuing work visas to any single female 20-40 without a criminal record to work in the US for 5-7 years at a time. That demographic will provide us with a willing labor force especially in service jobs like nursing, elder care, child care, food service etc. As well as low crime rate, low drug and alcohol abuse rate, low utilization of social services. And if the worst happens, raise our birth rate. Singapore and Hong Kong have been doing that for years with very few attendant social problems, and I certainly would not propose making them take a lower minimum wage or restricting their employment choices like Hong Kong and Singapore do.
Only if they agree to be sterilized.
Anyone can now self identify as Ukranian.
The post is what is defined in every dictionary as a "no brainer". Toronto, near where I used to live is a vibrant, multi-cultural city that works!
Consider the situation in the U. S. We have a critical shortage of labor. We have a large number of working age adults, many of whom probably have much needed skills who want to come here. Almost all of them have a great work ethic, as anyone who has watched them work knows very well.
So what is our immigration policy? Well obviously we don't want these people in our nation. Many of them speak Spanish, or some other foreign language. And Republicans think they will all vote Democratic, even though Hispanics are moving toward the GOP, and even if they are not, they will not be able to vote for many years because, well, because they will not be citizens.
But the anti-immigrant folks, most of whose families are here because they immigrated to the United States, are not going to be swayed by logic, self interest, rational thought etc. No their hatred rules over everything else, to the detriment of themselves and the rest of us.
Well said, Sidney.
We do not have a critical labor shortage. that is a myth. We have people who don't want to do the available jobs and are subsidized by govt not to work.
We have lawyers making it unbearable to go to work. In addition to hundreds of quack regulations, if one makes a joke, or expresses an emotion, one gets put through the HR ringer. So Boomers said, enough, and quit en masse this past year. Crush the lawyer profession and its quack, tyrannical practices, and you get flooded with workers. Immigrants hurt Democrat constituents the most by driving down wages for the enrichment of tech billionaires. They are servants of the Chinese Commie Party. Finkel, stop being a Commie running dog.
Well I would stop being a Commie running dog if I knew what that was. I mean I know what a Commie is and I have a wonderful dog that I take out running, but I just cannot connect the two. As far as I know my dog is registered to vote as an Independent.
Yeah but what if they decide to become truckers, and don't want to get vaccinated?
You didn't really think that through, did you.
1. New York is a multicultural city just like Toronto.
2. The real issue is the labor force participation rate in the US. It's currently sitting at 62%...we haven't seen rates that low since the late 70's, when women were still entering the workforce (Pandemic years excluded). If we can get the LFPR back up to 63% (where it was before the pandemic), that's millions of new workers. If we can get it back up to 2007-2008 levels (66%), there's no problem at all.
Long story short...we don't need more immigrants. We just need more Americans working.
And for some strange reason, the higher wages are the higher the participation rate.
You understand that the average age of the U.S. population is consistently increasing, right? And that we expect to see labor force participation to drop as we have more retirees and fewer people of working age. (By percentage, I mean.)
Wait a second. Pretty sure that statistic doesn't count people under 18 and over 65. So an aging population shouldn't matter.
The labor force participation rate doesn't count people under 16; it does include those over 65.
"You understand....."
Yes. However, this only accounts for a small part in the labor force participation rate drop.
The majority of the drop is due to people of prime working age (25-54) dropping out of the labor force. Particularly men.
From 2000 to 2020 the labor force participation rate for men 25-54 has dropped from 91.6% to 87.9%, nearly 4%. Focusing on the
25 - 34 group, the drop is even more dramatic, 93.4% to 87.1%, more than 6%. Millions of workers there, lost.
Getting those men back in the labor force should be a priority. "Replacing" them with immigrants does a disservice.
https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/civilian-labor-force-participation-rate.htm
Nearly every statement is here a complete lie.
For starters, even if they won't be able to vote for many years, the "many years" is now past. The waves of worthless immigrants who came from 1965-1985 now are voting themselves, and have voting children and gradnchildren.
How did that "temporary" refugee status for Hondurans turn out? I mean, the hurricane hit in 1998 so I bet they have left, given the whole "TEMPORARY" status thing. It's been 23+ years now. So, any of them still here?
There are? Tens of thousand still here? After more than 2 decades?
THAT is why we should not do this thing ever again. It is abused and temporary, thanks to advocates like Somin, becomes permanent easily.
Screw that noise.
There is no such thing as a temporary refugee on a large scale. If you let people stay as refugees you can safely assume it will be basically a permanent program. Anyone who proposes a temporary refugee program should be prosecuted for lying or at least sent back until they come up with a truthful proposal removing the temporary language.
America has experienced -- and defeated -- successive waves of ignorance and intolerant, often related to skin color, religion, nationality, or perceived economic pressures, throughout its history.
Those targeted by substandard Americans have included Jews, blacks, Italians, Hispanics, Asians, Catholics, gays, women, Irish, eastern Europeans, other Asians, native Americans, Muslims, other Hispanics -- most of America, at one time or another.
The beauty and strength of America, however, is that the bigoted immigrant-haters don't win here. They get to rant and rail, mutter and sputter, whine and whimper, even control the levers of government from time to time . . . but in America the bigots don't win, not over time. That, and the associated immigration, has made this nation strong and resilient, diverse and successful.
Our latest batch of bigots is nothing special, its reliance on the charms, insights, and integrity of Donald Trump, QAnon, the Deep South, the can't-keep-up backwaters, and the Republican Party notwithstanding. Better Americans have been putting bigots in their place in this nation for so long as anyone reading this has been alive, and that is destined to continue.
So carry on, clingers . . . and the Volokh Conspiracy, official blog of white male grievance . . . but only so long and so far as better Americans permit, as has become customary in modern, improving, reasoning America.
Rev sir...my grandparents who immigrated from Italy married, stayed married, never took a dime in welfare, learned english and worked their back ends off. And they became proud Americans not people who hate their own country because it is "racist."
We don't need mothers with five kids and no daddy coming here. And we don't need "haters" yes even engineers or "tech" types who bring their hatred of Americans based on how some European country colonized their home country (the current CEO of Twitter).
Do you consider superstitious gay-bashers to be among the "haters?"
Artie said, "...and defeated -- successive waves of ignorance and intolerant," Yet, we are still waiting for his resignation to be replaced by a diverse immigrant. When will his ignorance and intolerance yield to superior woke behavior? Artie needs to STFU until he resigns and interviews his replacement. He needs to pay for a translator, of course, as required by the Department of Labor. What is your lawyer specialty, Artie? An immigrant can do it for half the salary.
Do you have any data that suggests that those Hondurans are a net detriment to the US, or are you just flying your bigot flag?
Can I ask you how they are net economic producers? If we are talking about young women with five kids and no daddy? What is the opportunity cost there?
And how productive will those 5 kids be when they grow up? After all, your family didn't just sit on its collective arse collecting benefits when they grew up - why think that these kids would? Or are you thinking that because they might be brown, their work ethic will suck?
Well, I grew up in a complete family headed up by a husband who worked full time, my own family is the same.
If the refugees really are women with 5 kids, they're going straight on welfare and staying there, unless they either head back home after the war, (Ideal, 'refuge' is only supposed to be temporary.) remarry locals, or, worst case, their husbands follow them.
The prognosis for kids raised by single mothers on welfare is terrible, really terrible.
Have you looked into what benefits refugees can get?
Plus, while there isn't a lot of class mobility in America these days, immigrants are an exception.
https://economics.princeton.edu/working-papers/intergenerational-mobility-of-immigrants-over-two-centuries/
"Have you looked into what benefits refugees can get?"
Yeah, I have. There's considerable cash, as well as assistance for single mothers.
"Plus, while there isn't a lot of class mobility in America these days, immigrants are an exception."
Yeah, if they're not single mothers, sure. Again, things do not typically end up well for the children of single mothers.
Especially when the single mothers are 85 IQ black women.
I don't think they're interested in evidence...
It's hilarious that you think wanting to protect unskilled US labor from massive competition, and thereby minimize welfare spending, is bigotry. Why do you want more Americans to live in poverty?
Bernard likes cheap labor to cut his yard.
Why do you think there is a fixed amount of work to be done?
What's he's arguing is that a "temporary" refugee program, in practice, is nothing of the sort. It's a permanent immigrant program, where a disaster 20 years in the past still makes one eligible for the protected status.
Perhaps what's worse about it however, is TPS doesn't make one eligible for a green card or US citizenship. It wasn't really meant to, it's meant to be temporary. But given how it's utilized, as a 20 year plus "refugee" program, what it creates is a permanent underclass of workers in the US who can basically never get US citizenship.
Point being, if you want a temporary refugee program...it should actually be temporary. If you by contrast want an immigrant program, then that should be the goal. But a 20-plus year "temporary" refugee program just creates a permanent underclass that can never vote or get a green card...and is abusive.
Massive, heavily armed gangs are ethnically cleansing blacks from their long traditional neighborhoods through violence. They are 100 times more vicious than KKK night riders. Democrats are doing nothing about it, to avoid looking racist.
Yes, most of them are mestizos with average IQs of 80-90. They aren't able to compete in our service based economy, and their innate lack of intelligence means they'll always need financial support, and that means they'll vote for Democrats.
"I don't like how this program works" != "it is abused."
It is abused. The "temporary" is always sold to be until the situation at home is fixed, and then even if it is fixed, leftists says "Well, now they've established lives and families here, and they have citizen children, so it's cruel to make them leave now!" Rinse, wash, repeat.
What do you call a permanent underclass of immigrants who will never have the option to get a US green card or citizenship, never have the ability to even apply to vote, and can't even leave the country without the US government saying so, or else they automatically lose their work status...
I call it abuse.
That sounds like you're claiming that the purported beneficiaries of the program are being abused. But that wasn't damikesc's claim. He was claiming that they were committing the abuse.
And I quote "It is abused and temporary"
Which means the program is abused.
By who you ask? Perhaps the "liberal" elite who like having a permanent underclass who can't vote, yet like having lots of non-voting people in their districts.
You could argue it wasn't in American interests to import so many socialists, marxists, and secularists. And so many were escaping communism or at least the Soviet regime they didn't like)
They to this day tend to push far left cultural marxism in our institutions and for young American kids to die in "old world" grudges. Look at the neocons in the WSJ, NYT, and Wapo..
You don't like secularists? Are you a fan of adult-onset superstition instead? Are you gullible enough to claim that fairy tales are true?
Ilya never seems to advocate that his own Mother Russia throw open its borders. They might even take the likes of him.
Pretty sure that's because he's a loyal American, chief.
Loyal to what, chief?
To America. As in, not to 'his own Mother Russia.'
Amazing how many of these anti-immigrant commenters end up with in some dodgy dual-loyalty bigotry so often.
A country without borders is no longer a country.
So when you spend your career advocating for your country to throw its borders wide open, what exactly are you loyal to at that point?
I disagree with him as well, but I'm not going to go from that to he's not a loyal American.
And I'm also not going to bring his immigration history into it in some lame attempt at guilt by ancestry to bolster my case he's not loyal because I disagree with him.
A country that allows relatively free movement across its borders is not a country without borders.
(And of course this post isn't even about allowing free movement; it's only about admitting refugees.)
Most Jews are not loyal to America. This is beyond dispute at this point.
To elaborate on this, they always see all immigration through the Jewish experience. They think that because their bubbe immigrated here with nothing and made something of herself, that every low IQ peasant from Central America will too.
They think that "Because we were strangers in the land of Egypt" should be a guiding principle for immigration law.
If we take more aggressive steps to curb the ongoing genocide, we wouldn't have to open our doors. Most Ukrainians prefer to stay in Ukraine.
Are you going to let able bodied males 18-60 flee the country, breaking Ukrainian law?
They already have an important job, killing Russians.
Just a few weeks ago when I was in Athens, I saw a youngish man, certainly less than 40 homeless on the street with a sign, in English:
"Ukrainian refugee, please help"
I refrained from saying something like why aren't you at home fighting?
But when I walked back by an hour or so later he had changed his sign: "Homeless, please help".
The young able bodied Ukrainian refugee angle probably wasn't that well thought out, or well received.
Ukrainian refugees. Men? There are reports that 1/3 are not from the Ukraine. As for the war, go back to 2014. Go back to the Holomodore which resulted in the Holocaust. Then go further back to study the relationship between the regions of Ukraine and Russia. Is Zelensky a comedian-dancer-actor globalist puppet who occasionally broadcasts from a Polish American embassy, or is he a statesman of a corrupt country? Is a U.S. client state becoming a Russian client state? Like the Spanish Civil war, for those who want to fight in it, just go, while some Ukrainian men are refugees.
Correction: Holodomor (not Holomodore)
Any data on how many Ukrainians actually want to come to the U.S. or Canada, instead of staying in Europe?
I am curious if the present regime realizes they may not be importing the type of voter they want
Jon Biden thinks the voters will be okay as long as they don't vote for that Brandon guy.
Setting aside the ridiculous framing — and the fact that these people probably realize that the previous regime was on the other side in this war — you know that refugees can't vote, right?
To clarify, I forgot that this post was about Canada. I am not casting aspersions on Steven Harper. Just on TFG in this country.
The daily Volokh snooze fest zzzzz
You know, Nardz and other Putineers better be careful about all his shilling for Putin or he could end up like this:
Russia descends into farce as paranoid Putin 'arrests man who invented Putinism'
Pip Cook
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1595496/Russia-news-Vladimir-Putin-Vladislav-Surkov-arrest-Ukraine-war-update-1595496