Poilievre stated that anyone who commits a crime in Canada should face deportation

The Canadian justice system has sparked controversy with its handling of non-citizen criminals, prompting calls for reform. Pierre Poilievre's stance that individuals who commit crimes in Canada without being citizens or permanent residents should be deported has garnered significant attention. While some propose leniency for those on student visas or other temporary permits, concerns arise about the reliability of the judicial process.

Critics argue that liberal laws have created a system where repeat offenders can be released shortly after their latest arrest. Moreover, serious offenders may receive lenient sentences, such as house arrest or early parole, despite the severity of their crimes. The recent case of Paul Bernardo's transfer to a medium-security facility has drawn public outrage. The Liberal government bears responsibility for these legal frameworks, and Mark Carney, as a former economic advisor, has been criticized for not taking action to change these laws.

The proposed ruling to reduce sentences for temporary residents who commit crimes has been met with widespread criticism for being unjust. It raises questions about the fairness of sentencing, where an individual's immigration status seems to influence their punishment. In response, Conservative immigration critic Michelle Rempel is introducing legislation to prohibit judges from applying sentencing discounts based on immigration status. The proposed legislation aims to ensure that anyone who commits a crime in Canada, regardless of their visa status, faces deportation.

This debate highlights the need for a re-examination of Canada's justice system, particularly when it comes to non-citizen criminals. It is essential to strike a balance between fairness and accountability, ensuring that the punishment fits the crime, regardless of the offender's immigration status.