Justin Trudeau's antics aside, there's a rather funny (or sad, depending on your perspective) thing happening in Canada right now, related to illegal immigrants.
You see, according to current Canadian laws, if you arrive, from the United States, to an official US-Canada border crossing seeking refugee status in Canada, and you don't have a valid reason to get it (most often because the United States is legally considered a safe country for refugees, so there is no international or national legal precedent for anybody to seek refuge in a neighboring country), you are simply denied access and turned back. And that's what's mostly done, because the border officials generally uphold the law.
However, there's this funny loophole in the law. If you then walk 500 meters to the side and cross the US-Canada border illegally, now you will automatically get refugee status in Canada, and you will be taken in. You will not get turned back immediately, as you were at the official border crossing, where you were seeking refugee status legally. Instead, you will be automatically granted refugee status because you entered the country illegally. All you need to do is to claim that you are a refugee fleeing from war (even though you are coming from the United States, not from some middle-Easter country.)
And lots of "refugees" are taking full advantage of this loophole. There are, and I kid you not, people taking taxis from diverse parts of the US, traveling hundreds and hundreds of kilometers to the US-Canada border, paying the taxi, and then just walking over the border.
To the welcoming arms of the Canadian police. They will not only not turn you back, they will in fact help you carry your luggage. I'm not making that up. The Canadian press even has had photo ops of these things (to, of course, write virtue-signaling articles about how welcoming and friendly Canadians are to "refugees".)
The sad thing is that the government, under Trudeau's leadership, seems to have no intention of closing this loophole, regardless of numerous protests of some more critical parliamentarian representatives.
One has to ask the question of how legal it is for a government to not only address, but in fact promote, illegal activity that abuses a loophole in the system, with no intention of fixing said loophole.