The problem of boundaries: the Constitution and the meaning of citizenship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the bottom of all immigration laws lie political theory conundrums about boundaries, scope, and closure. In this paper, I examine the politics of immigration law through the prism of long-term permanent residents. Where political theory is plain about the reach of moral obligations and the value of membership in a political community, immigration law is both obscure about such matters and vested in that obscurity. I consider this relationship through two valences. First, I examine the constitutional provision pertaining to permanent residence, comparing the narrow negotiating history and early economic interpretations of section 6 of the Charter to the provision’s later role underwriting the most fundamental and exclusionary principle of immigration law in the Chiarelli case. Second, I review the small handful of Federal Court cases which directly address long-term permanent residents as a category of people, and examine how they intersect with concepts of substantive citizenship. Rights of citizenship that are not anchored in the state and the concept of the denizen are notions that bridge the political theory / immigration law divide. The doctrinal turns employed in Canadian jurisprudence to keep long term permanent residents beyond the reach of political community reveal that immigration law has not yet come to terms with its political foundations.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".