The Chiarelli Doctrine: Immigration Exceptionalism and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the 19th century, American courts have relied on the “plenary power doctrine” to hold that federal immigration law is immune from constitutional challenge. Despite no such rule in Canada, this paper argues that a similar doctrine has silently crept into Canadian constitutional law. With its roots in the Supreme Court of Canada’s 1992 decision in Chiarelli, Canadian courts have set out a doctrine of evasion and technicality that has rendered many of the Charter rights of immigrants and refugees to be effectively non-justiciable. Without explanation, laws that detain, uproot, exile, separate families, and return people to persecution have been exempted from normal standards of justice. This paper charts the emergence of the “Chiarelli doctrine”, critiques its incoherence, and explores why judges have so steadfastly refused to engage with the human rights claims of non-citizens. It concludes with a simple proposal to bring these doctrines of exception to an end.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it