Decisions by country · Guideline B · Foreign Influence
Ties to Canada in decided clearance cases
How decided foreign-influence cases involving ties to Canada resolved, from the public record. Ties to any country are not themselves disqualifying; every case turns on its own facts. This is decided history, never a prediction, and it says nothing about any nationality or community.
The ties these cases involved
The relationship kinds identified on Canada allegations in these cases (a case can involve several).
- sibling in foreign country · 22 cases
- parent in foreign country · 9 cases
- spouse dual or foreign citizen · 7 cases
- extended family in foreign country · 6 cases
- unspecified foreign relationship · 4 cases
- foreign real estate · 3 cases
- foreign bank account or investment · 3 cases
What judges credited in granted cases
Circumstances the judge expressly credited among granted Canada cases where that detail was extracted (a subset of the record, so these are raw counts, not rates).
- deep U.S. ties · credited in 4 granted cases
Recent decided examples
- ISCR 18-00342 granted · 2019The applicant in this case was a 32-year-old linguist employed by a Department of Defense contractor, seeking to maintain his security clearance. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reason…
- ISCR 16-04056.h1 granted · 2018The judge found that the applicant's foreign contacts in Taiwan did not create a heightened risk of foreign influence or coercion. The applicant's ties to Taiwan were deemed routine and not likely to …
- ISCR 19-00446 denied · 2019The applicant in this case was a dual citizen of the United States and Egypt, who worked for a defense contractor in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) from May 2014 to November 2016. The Department of De…
- ISCR 18-01740 denied · 2020The applicant in this case was a 51-year-old manufacturing planner employed by a major aerospace company since 2007, seeking a security clearance to work on defense contracts. The Department of Defens…
Other countries in the record
Have foreign family or contacts and wondering how the process treats it? Ask the assistant, read Guideline B explained, or get a written, human-reviewed response through Answers. Descriptive research only: not legal advice or a prediction.