Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner is spearheading a legislative effort to standardize sentencing in Canadian courts, challenging a practice that critics argue creates a two-tier justice system. Her private member's bill, Bill C-220, seeks to prevent judges from considering a convicted person's immigration status when determining their sentence for serious offences.
The Core of Bill C-220
The proposed legislation contains a straightforward but significant clause. It mandates that a court shall not take into consideration any potential impact the sentence could have on the offender's immigration status in Canada, or on that of a member of their family when sentencing a non-citizen. This move directly addresses a sentencing principle established by a 2013 court ruling, which allowed such considerations.
Under current immigration law, a non-citizen faces automatic deportation if they receive a prison sentence of more than six months or are convicted of an offence with a maximum penalty of ten years or more. Consequently, judges have sometimes imposed conditional sentences (served in the community) or shorter jail terms to avoid triggering these immigration consequences for the offender.
Pushback and Recent Cases
This approach has faced growing scrutiny. In August 2025, the B.C. Court of Appeal overturned a conditional sentence given to an individual convicted of aggravated assault. The appellate court found the sentencing judge gave excessive weight to the defendant's potential deportation, a decision seen as a signal that the 2013 precedent is being re-evaluated.
Rempel Garner has highlighted extreme cases to underscore the need for her bill. She cited the example of an accused who admitted to repeatedly raping a 13-year-old girl, resulting in two pregnancies. Reports from BarrieToday.com indicate the man, a non-citizen and father to 13 children, was given time ahead of his January 2026 sentencing to consider how a guilty plea would affect his immigration status. This case has sparked public outrage and fueled the debate over equitable justice.
Re-establishing a Principle of Equal Justice
Proponents of Bill C-220 argue that the current practice undermines the fundamental principle that the punishment should fit the crime, not the offender's citizenship. They contend it creates an unfair system where non-citizens can receive more lenient sentences for the same crimes committed by Canadian citizens.
The bill reflects a stance that Canadian citizenship is a privilege, and those who breach the nation's laws through serious criminal acts should face consistent consequences. Rempel Garner's move to have the bill referred to a committee for study is a critical step in the legislative process, aiming to inject what she calls "sanity" into court sentencing by removing immigration status as a mitigating factor.
The outcome of this legislative effort could significantly alter sentencing practices across Canada, ensuring that immigration consequences remain separate from the judicial determination of an appropriate penalty for a criminal act.
