Avi Lewis Pledges to Reverse Bill C-12 and Carney’s Immigration Cuts

(CANADA) — Avi Lewis moved on Tuesday to make immigration a defining political fight after winning the federal New Democratic Party leadership on March 29, 2026, pledging to reverse Prime Minister Mark Carney’s immigration cuts and repeal Bill C-12.

Lewis put a “Status for All” platform at the center of that push. He called for a “single-tier immigration system” that grants permanent residency on arrival, and he vowed to undo Carney’s 2026 reductions in international student permits.

He also promised to hire 3,000 additional caseworkers immediately to clear a backlog of over 1 million applications and to cancel the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement, arguing the United States is “not safe for refugees” under current enforcement policies.

Bill C-12 Becomes the Main Flashpoint

Bill C-12, which passed on March 26, 2026, has become the sharpest point of conflict between Lewis and Carney’s government. The law bars asylum claims made more than one year after entry or more than 14 days after an irregular border crossing.

It also grants the government “mass-cancellation” powers for groups of visas if deemed in the “public interest.” At the same time, it stabilizes permanent resident targets at 380,000 annually through 2028, down from the 500,000+ levels seen in 2024.

Those changes place Lewis on the opposite side of a Liberal government that has tied tighter immigration controls to border enforcement and cross-border cooperation with Washington. The split has widened as Carney’s administration has presented Bill C-12 as part of a broader security agenda.

Canadian officials said during parliamentary testimony in March 2026 that they were in constant engagement with DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and U.S. Border Czar Tom Homan. The Canadian government said Bill C-12 “advances shared Canada-U.S. priorities, such as disrupting the movement of illegal fentanyl and bolstering border security.”

Lewis has framed that shift in far harsher terms. He described the current North American immigration regime as a “machinery of deportation,” and he recently called U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement “absolutely horrifying” for its use of detention facilities.

His language targets not only Carney’s immigration cuts but the wider security-first approach that has shaped policy on both sides of the border. That has turned immigration into one of the clearest ideological divides between the NDP and the Carney Liberal administration.

The Numbers Behind the Dispute

The numbers at issue are stark. Carney’s 2026 cuts reduced international student permits by 49%, to 155,000, a move Lewis says he would reverse.

Students already in Canada now face added uncertainty as they try to move from temporary status to permanent residency. The reduction has led to a “crisis of uncertainty” for those seeking that transition.

For asylum seekers, Bill C-12 carries immediate consequences. Thousands of people who have been in Canada for over a year without filing a claim are now ineligible for an oral hearing before the Immigration and Refugee Board.

That change reaches beyond refugee law. It touches people who entered through regular channels and delayed filing, as well as those who crossed irregularly and missed the law’s 14-day deadline.

Lewis’s call to scrap the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement ties those domestic rules to conditions in the United States. He argues Canada should no longer rely on U.S. asylum protections while Washington tightens screening, travel rules and other immigration controls.

U.S. Policy Shifts Add Pressure

U.S. agencies have not commented on Lewis’s platform, but recent statements from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the Department of Homeland Security show the broader climate he is reacting to. Those announcements came as the Trump administration pressed ahead with restrictions and legal defenses tied to asylum, border screening and temporary worker programs.

On March 30, 2026, USCIS announced a partial resumption of asylum processing. The agency said it has “lifted the adjudicative hold for asylum seekers from countries considered lower risk,” though a freeze remains for 39 nations under the current travel ban, including Somalia, Nigeria, and Afghanistan.

That move partly rolled back the near-blanket halt on immigration paperwork initiated in late 2025. Even with the change, asylum processing remains restricted for many nationalities.

Earlier in the month, litigation over Temporary Protected Status for Somalia forced another policy update. USCIS said: “On March 13, 2026, the U.S. District Court. issued an order staying the TPS Somalia termination. This guidance supersedes the message posted on March 17, 2026”.

That court order came from the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. It halted the termination of TPS for Somalia and forced USCIS to update its public guidance.

USCIS also confirmed on March 20, 2026, that it had reached the statutory cap for the second half of FY 2026 for H-2B visas. In that announcement, the agency said, “Since taking office, President Trump has prioritized national security. by implementing a series of executive orders. that mandate strict screening and vetting”

Taken together, those actions show an immigration system still moving under tighter screening rules even where Washington has eased some earlier freezes. That matters in Canada because Lewis has explicitly linked Carney’s approach to the direction of U.S. enforcement.

Cross-border travel rules have added another layer of concern for Canadians who spend long periods in the United States. DHS updated “Alien Registration Requirements,” creating confusion for Canadian non-immigrants, including snowbirds.

A March 12, 2026 rule waived fingerprinting for Canadian non-immigrants. But travelers staying in the United States for more than 30 days must now “carry proof of registration at all times.”

That requirement sits alongside the more sweeping shifts in asylum and border screening. For Canadian policymakers, it also illustrates how changes in U.S. rules can quickly affect people who do not see themselves as part of the immigration system.

Lewis’s Broader Immigration Vision

Lewis has tried to make that argument central to his leadership launch. His platform does not limit itself to refugee claims or student numbers; it presents a much broader redesign of Canada’s immigration model.

Under his plan, permanent residency would begin at arrival rather than after years in temporary categories. He says that would end the stratified system that leaves workers, students and asylum seekers in different legal tiers.

His proposal to add 3,000 additional caseworkers immediately aims to address the backlog of over 1 million applications. That backlog has become one of the clearest practical tests of whether Ottawa can process cases as quickly as it sets policy.

Bill C-12 moves in the opposite direction. By limiting asylum claims after one year or after 14 days following an irregular crossing, the law narrows access at the front end while also giving the government broad authority to cancel groups of visas.

Its immigration planning numbers also signal a reset. Stabilizing permanent resident targets at 380,000 annually through 2028 marks a sustained reduction from the 500,000+ levels seen in 2024.

For Carney’s government, those limits align with a political case for tighter management. For Lewis, they amount to Carney’s immigration cuts and a retreat from Canada’s previous approach.

That contrast explains why Bill C-12 became an immediate target after Lewis’s win. Repealing it allows him to challenge both the law’s direct effects and the Liberal argument that public confidence depends on harder limits.

The debate is also unfolding while U.S. agencies publish new guidance and defend contested programs. Official updates continue to appear through the USCIS Newsroom and DHS official statements, while Ottawa’s immigration portal carries government information on Bill C-12 and related immigration policy.

Lewis’s position gives the NDP a simple message, but one that clashes directly with the continental mood on enforcement. He is arguing for broader status, faster regularization and fewer border barriers at a moment when both Ottawa and Washington have moved toward more screening and more restrictions.

His rhetoric makes that clash unmistakable. By calling the current system a “machinery of deportation,” he places his party against the institutions and assumptions driving policy on both sides of the border.

That message may resonate most strongly with the people already caught between categories. Asylum seekers face the one-year and 14-day limits under Bill C-12, students confront the 49% cut in permits, and long-stay travelers to the United States must adjust to new registration rules.

For them, this is not an abstract policy dispute. It is a fight over who gets to stay, who gets heard and what kind of immigration system Canada wants to build after Carney’s immigration cuts.