The statutory authorities to remove and to review appeals of removal assigned in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) exist in a complicated, interweaving relationship with the legal power to sentence held by judges of the criminal court. Judges do not retain the legal authority to decide on removal. Judges do, however, hold the jurisdiction to consider deportation at sentencing. The practice of judicial jurisdiction in turn has potentially significant effects for subsequent practices of jurisdiction under the IRPA, including where judges use their legal power to apply sentences protecting permanent residents from removal and/or losing their right of appeal. Despite these important jurisdictional connections, how judicial authority to consider deportation is enacted has not received scholarly examination. This paper draws from an analysis of case law and interviews to address this gap, tracing how judges practice their jurisdiction when sentencing permanent residents.

This paper describes a simpler way for programmers to reason about the correctness of their code. The study of semantics of logic programs has shown strong links between the model theoretic semantics (truth and falsity of atoms in the programmer's interpretation of a program), procedural semantics (for example, SLD resolution) and fixpoint semantics (which is useful for program analysis and alternative execution mechanisms). Most of this work assumes that intended interpretations are two-valued: a ground atom is true (and should succeed according to the procedural semantics) or false (and should not succeed). In reality, intended interpretations are less precise. Programmers consider that some atoms “should not occur” or are “ill-typed” or “inadmissible”. Programmers don't know and don't care whether such atoms succeed. In this paper we propose a three-valued semantics for (essentially) pure Prolog programs with (ground) negation as failure which reflects this. The semantics of Fitting is similar but only associates the third truth value with non-termination. We provide tools to reason about correctness of programs without the need for unnatural precision or undue restrictions on programming style. As well as theoretical results, we provide a programmer-oriented synopsis. This work has come out of work on declarative debugging, where it has been recognised that inadmissible calls are important.