4 ms·

they are seeking to block an entry waiver pre-emptively? I suppose that saves the application for a waiver, and she can just appeal right away via federal cour

• desdiv 5y ago
  Here's the timeline of events (AFAIK): 1. On 2017-09-22, Ms. Manning attempted to enter Canada but was denied by the border guards. [0] 2. On or about On 2017-09-25, Ms. Manning received a letter from the Canadian government detailing why she was previously denied entry. 3. Ms. Manning and her lawyers files an appeal to the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board. A tribunal hearing is scheduled for 2021-10-07. Let's call this hearing "Hearing A". 4. While Hearing A was still pending, the Canadian government allowed Ms. Manning entry for a few days into Canada in 2018. 5. Both sides (the Canadian border official side and Ms. Manning's side) are able to argue their case before Hearing A. The title of this news story refers to the fact that the border official side plans to put forth an argument in Hearing A. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41391072 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41391072
  • inter_netuser 5y ago
    This seems rather standard. The fact that she was allowed despite rather well known criminal charges and jail time points to rather high likelyhood of her appeal being successful. I think that is highly unusual. This is probably just a campaign to generate some favourable publicity.
• q1w2 5y ago
  As someone who is neither in Canada, nor a Canadian citizen, would she even have jurisdiction to appeal to a Canadian court? Can anyone in the world file a case with the Canadian Supreme court and be heard? They would need to have some sort of legal standing to appear before the court.
  • freeone3000 5y ago
    She applied for entry and was rejected. That's enough standing.