Library

Academic Freedom, Speech and Collective Responsibility in Canada

This survey examines Canadians’ views on the limits of academic freedom and acceptable expression, with particular attention to political advocacy in the classroom, religious and ethnic prejudice, historical denial and collective responsibility. The findings come from a Leger survey of 1,538 Canadians conducted for the Association for Canadian Studies from September 4 to 6, 2026. Six in ten Canadians believe academic freedom should not protect professors who use class time to advocate political views unrelated to the subject being taught. Younger adults are less certain about where to draw this boundary. Respondents who support such protection are also considerably more likely to regard the justification of terrorism, the denial of documented atrocities and the minimization of their victims as acceptable. Most Canadians reject statements that portray religious or ethnic communities as inherently untrustworthy, attribute harmful beliefs to an entire religion or hold members of a religious group collectively responsible for the actions of a foreign government. Nevertheless, younger respondents are consistently more likely to consider such statements acceptable, including one-third of those under 25 who say it is acceptable to question whether a well-documented historical atrocity occurred. The findings also examine whether Muslims should be expected to denounce terrorism committed in the name of Islam, Jewish Canadians to condemn actions of the Israeli government and Russian Canadians to denounce actions of the Russian government. These expectations are not symmetrical: criticism of an elected government’s policies or military actions is not comparable to condemning terrorism. The comparison nevertheless reveals a common tendency to require members of religious or national-origin communities to answer publicly for conduct over which they have no individual control or responsibility.

Canadians Doubt Prospects for Global Reconciliation as International Divisions Strain Friendships

A Leger survey conducted for the Association for Canadian Studies from September 4 to 6, 2026, finds considerable pessimism about the prospects for resolving several major international conflicts. Among the four conflicts examined, Canadians view the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians as the least reconcilable: only 14% believe reconciliation is possible, compared with 23% for Russia and Ukraine, 26% for Iran and Western countries, and 35% for Russia and the United States. Younger Canadians are generally more optimistic than older respondents, while men are more likely than women to see the conflicts as reconcilable. Francophones express particularly strong pessimism, with 68% describing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as irreconcilable, compared with 55% of anglophones. This pessimism extends beyond international relations into Canadians’ personal lives. Just over half of respondents, 52%, believe it is becoming increasingly difficult for people with opposing views on major international conflicts to remain friends, while only 21% disagree. This perception is remarkably consistent across French-speaking, English-speaking and allophone Canadians, suggesting that the polarizing effects of international conflicts cross linguistic boundaries. The findings point to a broader concern: global conflicts increasingly shape domestic relationships and make it more difficult to preserve dialogue across deeply held political differences.

Hear No Antisemitism See No Antisemitism

Surveyed for the November-December 2025 Campus Antisemitism and Student Experiences (CASE) study, Canadian Jewish postsecondary students do not divide neatly into a Zionist/anti-Zionist binary. The CASE survey therefore uses a four-point spectrum that captures variation in the importance respondents assign to Zionism: most say it is very important to their identity, others say it is somewhat important, and smaller shares say it is not very important or not important at all. At the core of the analysis is this distribution in the importance assigned to Zionism. The survey instrument did not provide respondents with a definition of Zionism in connection with this item; responses therefore reflect respondents' own understandings of the term (though CASE is informed by the IHRA definition of Antisemitism). This differs from the published CASE report, which provides a terminology definition of Zionism for readers of the report. As Table 1 shows, 69% of respondents with valid answers to this item say Zionism is very important to their identity, 18% say it is somewhat important, and 13% say it is either not very important or not important at all; the "not important at all" endpoint represents 7% of respondents. Comparing respondents across this spectrum reveals sharp differences in attachment to Israel and other dimensions of Jewish identity, as well as markedly different reports and evaluations of antisemitism. The four groups are large enough to support comparison within the CASE sample, with some caution for the smaller categories.

The importance of our ancestral connections: The relationship between attachment to ethnic origin (s) and attachment to Canada

Nearly two-thirds of Canadians—64 per cent—say they are attached to their ethnic origins or ancestry, including 28 per cent who describe themselves as very attached. Attachment is relatively widespread across the country, reaching 67 per cent in both Quebec and Atlantic Canada, 66 per cent in British Columbia and 65 per cent in Ontario. Quebecers and British Columbians are the most likely to say they are very attached to their ancestry, at 33 and 32 per cent respectively. At the same time, national attachment remains considerably stronger. Eighty-two per cent of Canadians say they are attached to Canada, including 50 per cent who are very attached. Regional differences are nevertheless significant. Attachment to Canada reaches 92 per cent in Atlantic Canada, compared with 73 per cent in Quebec. Only 33 per cent of Quebecers say they are very attached to Canada, compared with 63 per cent in Atlantic Canada, 58 per cent in Alberta and 55 per cent in British Columbia. One of the most important findings concerns generational change. Canadians aged 18 to 24 are the age group most likely to say they are very attached to their ethnic origins, at 36 per cent. Yet 85 per cent of this same age group say they are attached to Canada. The youngest Canadians therefore appear comfortable holding both identities simultaneously. Their attachment to ancestry does not translate into rejection of the country. There is, however, a major age divide in the intensity of Canadian attachment. Only 40 per cent of Canadians aged 18 to 24 say they are very attached to Canada, compared with 62 per cent of those aged 55 to 64 and 69 per cent of those aged 65 and older. Younger Canadians are not necessarily detached from Canada, but their attachment is more likely to be qualified as “somewhat” rather than “very” strong.

AI and Chat Use: Lessons Learned

This study was conducted through a web-based survey among Canadians aged 18 and older. A total of 1,700 respondents completed the survey, including a booster sample of 200 individuals with an immigration background. The base sample of 1,500 respondents was distributed to reflect the general Canadian population, while the additional 200 respondents allowed for more robust analysis of immigrant populations. Respondents were randomly selected from Leger’s online panel and invited to participate via email. The questionnaire was available in both English and French. Fieldwork for this study took place from April 14 to April 27, 2026. The project was led by the Association for Canadian Studies in collaboration with the Diversity Institute and the Future Skills Centre – Centre des Compétences futures. The Future Skills Centre – Centre des Compétences futures is funded by the Government of Canada’s Future Skills program. The opinions and interpretations in this presentation are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Government of Canada.

Canadian Views on Selected Religions and on Atheism

The survey results suggest that Canadian opinion toward major religious groups is generally positive but uneven, with Christianity receiving the highest net-positive rating overall at 57%, followed by atheism at 50%, Judaism at 40%, and Islam at 26%. One of the most striking findings is generational: Canadians aged 18–24 give Islam its highest rating, at 41%, and place atheism highest of all at 58%, while older Canadians remain considerably more positive toward Christianity and Judaism. This points to a younger cohort that is less anchored in traditional Christian identification and more open toward religious diversity, though Islam still trails Judaism and Christianity in most groups. Regionally, Quebec stands out for ranking atheism slightly above Christianity and for giving comparatively low ratings to Islam and Judaism, while Ontario, Manitoba/Saskatchewan, and British Columbia are more positive toward Judaism and Islam than Quebec. The results also show that education, language, immigration status, and identity shape perceptions in important ways. University-educated Canadians are more positive toward all four categories, suggesting that education is associated not simply with secularism but with broader tolerance across religious and non-religious identities. Francophones give the lowest positive ratings to Islam and Judaism while ranking atheism highest, reflecting Quebec’s distinctive secular culture. By contrast, allophones and immigrants are more positive toward Christianity and Islam, and foreign-born Canadians are notably more positive toward Judaism than Canadian-born respondents. It is interesting to note that people who rate one religious or non-religious group positively often rate others positively as well, suggesting that favourable attitudes are less a zero-sum competition between faiths and more a general disposition toward pluralism. The major exception is that Islam remains the most weakly rated group, indicating that anti-Islamic sentiment or discomfort with Islam remains a significant challenge within the broader Canadian landscape of religious tolerance.

Patterns of Online Hate in Canada

It is important to recognize that celebrating diversity also requires confronting the forces that threaten it. Online hate has become one of the most visible and damaging challenges to social harmony, inclusion, and mutual respect in Canada. The findings from this survey underline the urgent need to forcefully address hate online, particularly when it targets religious, racialized, Indigenous, and LGBTQ+ communities. The survey, conducted by Leger for the Association for Canadian Studies between June 5 and 7, 2026, asked Canadians how often they had seen hateful content on social media or other online platforms directed at different groups. The results show that online hate is widely observed across Canadian society. The highest reported levels of hateful content were directed at Muslims, with 43% of Canadians saying they had often or sometimes seen such content online. Hateful content directed at Israelis was also widely reported, at 42%, followed by content targeting LGBTQ+ people at 38%, Arabs at 37%, Jews at 33%, Black persons at 31%, and Indigenous persons at 28%. Younger Canadians were consistently more likely than older Canadians to report seeing hateful content online. Among those aged 18 to 34, nearly half reported seeing hateful content directed at Muslims, and substantial shares reported seeing hate targeting Arabs, Israelis, LGBTQ+ people, Black persons, Jews, and Indigenous persons. This suggests that younger people’s greater exposure to online spaces may also increase their exposure to hate. Regional differences are also evident. Alberta reported some of the highest levels of exposure to hateful content directed at Muslims, Israelis, LGBTQ+ people, Arabs, Indigenous persons, and Black persons. Ontario and Manitoba/Saskatchewan also reported relatively high levels of exposure to hateful content directed at Jews. In Quebec, reported exposure was generally lower than in several other regions, particularly for hate targeting Jews, Israelis, and Indigenous persons.

Pride in Canada is Stable but Regionalism Appears on the Rise Everywhere Except in Alberta

As Canada prepares to mark Canada Day on July 1, 2026, the 159th anniversary of Confederation, questions of national identity and unity are again moving to the foreground. This is especially true in a year when Alberta is expected to hold a referendum in the fall touching on the province’s constitutional position, while Quebec’s coming provincial election is likely to unfold with national unity and sovereignty debates once again in view. Against this backdrop, the survey findings suggest that pride in being Canadian remains strong and broadly shared, with 86% of Canadians agreeing that they are proud to be Canadian. At the same time, the results point to a significant degree of regional and provincial attachment, as half of Canadians say they identify more strongly with their province or region than with Canada. Yet one of the most important findings is that these two sentiments are not necessarily in conflict: strong regional or provincial identification appears to do very little to undercut pride in being Canadian. In other words, many Canadians appear able to hold a strong attachment to Canada while also feeling a powerful connection to their province or region. The regional results add an important nuance, and even an irony, to the current unity debate: despite Alberta being at the centre of a prominent national discussion about provincial autonomy and separation, Albertans were the least likely of all regional groups surveyed to say they identify more strongly with their province or region than with Canada. Overall, the findings suggest that Canadian identity is not being displaced by regionalism so much as increasingly accompanied by it, with national pride and regional belonging coexisting in complex but not necessarily contradictory ways.

Immigration Update Canada 2026 Q1 Change relative to Q1 2025

As Soccer captures the attention of many North Americans did it move the ‘goalpost’ on Canadians sports preferences?

The 2026 FIFA World Cup, hosted in Canada, the United States and Mexico, has placed soccer at the center of considerable public and media attention across North America. With Canada participating in the tournament after previous appearances in 1986 and 2022—and now competing as a host nation—this study examines whether the heightened visibility of the World Cup is beginning to modify Canadians’ sports preferences. To examine the possible impact, the Association for Canadian Studies commissioned Leger to ask Canadians what their favorite sports to watch are over the course of the year. The findings from the July 10-12 survey suggest that hockey remains firmly atop the country’s favorite sports hierarchy, but that soccer is establishing a firm ‘foothold’, particularly among younger Canadians and allophones, many of whom are immigrants or have close connections to countries where soccer has long been the dominant sport. As Canada’s population becomes increasingly diverse, its current and future sporting preferences will likely be shaped by demographic change, producing a broader and more varied sports landscape even as hockey retains its leading place.

Give it all the Consideration it Deserves: How other Canadians Respond to Alberta Referendum Questions and How the Federal Government Might Respond

On October 19, 2026, Albertans are scheduled to vote on a series of referendum questions that would invite the province to seek greater authority in areas such as immigration, access to publicly funded programs, judicial appointments, Senate reform, federal program opt-outs and the priority of provincial law. The Association for Canadian Studies commissioned Leger Marketing to test the first nine Alberta referendum questions with respondents across Canada. For respondents outside Alberta, the wording was adapted by substituting the word province for Alberta. The objective was not to determine whether Canadians want to reinvent Canada, but to test the neutrality of the questions themselves and to assess whether their wording tends to produce affirmative answers across jurisdictions. The central finding is that almost all Canadians, not only Albertans, are inclined to vote yes to most of the first nine questions when they are presented in their Alberta referendum-style wording. That result says less about a broad national desire to remake the federation than about the way the questions are framed. The wording often links complex policy or constitutional proposals to attractive ideas such as sustainability, fairness, voter integrity, reasonable fees, provincial rights and protection from federal interference. Those cues make agreement easier and disagreement more difficult. The results have important implications for how federal authorities might assess the referendum results. A high yes vote may reveal real public anxieties about immigration levels, service capacity, fiscal fairness and federal-provincial relations. But the often suggestive/oriented question formulation cannot be treated as a clear basis for constitutional change or for a bilateral negotiation that would give Alberta powers that are unavailable to other provinces. Doing so could create precedents that other provinces might pursue with similar strategies. Survey Methodology: The findings are based on a Leger survey conducted for the Association for Canadian Studies from June 19-21, 2026, among 1528 Canadians. Because the survey was conducted through a non-probability online panel, no margin of error can be assigned. For comparison,.

Pride in Canada is Stable but Regionalism Appears on the Rise Everywhere Except in Alberta

As Canadians mark Canadian Multiculturalism Day, it is important to recognize that celebrating diversity also requires confronting the forces that threaten it. Online hate has become one of the most visible and damaging challenges to social harmony, inclusion, and mutual respect in Canada. The findings from this survey underline the urgent need to forcefully address hate online, particularly when it targets religious, racialized, Indigenous, and LGBTQ+ communities. The survey, conducted by Leger for the Association for Canadian Studies between June 5 and 7, 2026, asked Canadians how often they had seen hateful content on social media or other online platforms directed at different groups. The results show that online hate is widely observed across Canadian society. The highest reported levels of hateful content Hateful content directed at Israelis was also widely reported, at 42%, followed by content targeting LGBTQ+ people at 38%, Arabs at 37%, Jews at 33%, Black persons at 31%, and Indigenous persons at 28%. Younger Canadians were consistently more likely than older Canadians to report seeing hateful content online. Among those aged 18 to 34, nearly half reported seeing hateful content directed at Muslims, and substantial shares reported seeing hate targeting Arabs, Israelis, LGBTQ+ people, Black persons, Jews, and Indigenous persons. This suggests that younger people’s greater exposure to online spaces may also increase their exposure to hate.

Politicizing Memory: Who thinks the Holocaust should be put behind us?

The Holocaust was the systematic, state-sponsored persecution and murder of six million Jews by Nazi Germany and its collaborators, alongside the targeting of other groups, and it remains a defining warning about where antisemitism, dehumanization, and indifference can lead. A June 2027 Leger survey for the Association for Canadian Studies reveals that a majority of Canadians disagree that the Holocaust is an issue of the past and not as relevant to present day society. Still, an important minority—about one-third—does agree that the Holocaust is less relevant to present-day. that agreement with “moving on” from the Holocaust is not merely a neutral opinion as many of those who support this view disproportionately endorse antisemitic tropes as revealed in a deeper dive into the survey results. Among those who strongly agree that since October 7, 2023 they have become more negative toward Jewish people, 51% strongly agree that the Holocaust is mostly an issue of the past. Among those who strongly agree that Jewish people in Canada are responsible for the actions of the Israeli government, 55% strongly agree that the Holocaust is mostly an issue of the past and not as relevant to present-day society. Among those who strongly disagree that Canadian Jews are responsible for Israel’s government, only 7% strongly agree that the Holocaust is mostly in the past. The results illustrate that those who think it is time to “move on” from the Holocaust are more inclined to endorse the antisemitic trope of holding Jews collectively responsible for the actions of Israel. Put another way the cross-tabs suggest that Holocaust minimization and contemporary antisemitic generalization reinforce each other. People who collapse distinctions between Israel, the Israeli government, Jews globally, and Jews in Canada are also more likely to reject the continuing relevance of Holocaust memory. Of course not everyone who suggests that it is time to move on from the Holocaust is antisemitic but the data do confirm a strong link between contemporary antisemitic tropes and the weakening of Holocaust memory.

Making the connection: Antisemitism and Antizionism in Canada

Last week’s declaration by Prime Minister Mark Carney to create a Ministerial Advisory Council on Rights, Equality and Inclusion places renewed attention on the need to address racism, hate and inclusion in Canada, with the government indicating that confronting antisemitism will be a first priority. Against that backdrop, the Association for Canadian Studies commissioned the firm Leger to see how Canadians understand antisemitism, anti-Zionism, and the ways attitudes toward Israel may be affecting Jewish Canadians. Some one in three Canadians agree that antisemitic or anti-Jewish attitudes are becoming more acceptable in Canada. The survey reveals that 22% of Canadians agree that Israel’s military actions in Gaza justify negative attitudes toward Jewish people in Canada, and 17% say they have become more negative toward Jewish people since the October 7, 2023 terrorist attack in Israel. These attitudes are more pronounced among younger Canadians, men, immigrants and visible minorities. Some one in ten Canadians agree that Jews in Canada are responsible for the action of the Israeli government with one in six under 35 holding that view. The survey also finds that 39% of Canadians agree that saying Israel should cease to exist as a state is antisemitic, while 28% disagree and 33% are unsure. A similar proportion, 39%, agree that the Prime Minister should publicly condemn calls for Israel to cease to exist as a state. That said, amongst those who strongly agree that It is antisemitic to say that Israel should cease to exist as a state, some two-thirds believe that the Prime Minister of Canada should publicly condemn calls for Israel to cease to exist as a state Taken together, the findings suggest that while most Canadians do not endorse collective blame toward Jewish Canadians, there remains a significant minority that does, alongside a large segment of the public that is uncertain about the boundaries between criticism of Israel, anti-Zionism and antisemitism. To that end, the ACS-Leger survey offers valuable insights on where public education, policy attention and community engagement may be most needed when it comes to combatting antisemitism

Canadian Unity : where do things stand?

This special edition of Canadian Issues examines the state of national unity at a moment when Canada is once again confronted by old questions in new forms.

Canada by the Numbers: Comparing International Public Attitudes on Immigration: Economic Pressures, Integration, and the Future of Migration

In our latest webinar, we compared public attitudes toward immigration across Canada, France, the United States, Australia, Germany, and Italy, drawing on new findings from the International Social Survey Programme 2023 National Identity and Citizenship survey.

How worried are Canadians about the threat of Separation from Alberta and Quebec

Recent court decisions in Alberta have reinforced Indigenous claims that governments have a duty to consult on issues related to provincial sovereignty and separation, adding a significant new dimension to the debate that is also expected to feature in the October Quebec election campaign. Against this backdrop, the latest Leger survey conducted for the Association for Canadian Studies suggests that concern over the threat of separation has somewhat diminished compared to earlier polling, although comparisons should be made cautiously because the wording of the questions differed. The survey nevertheless indicates that Canadians continue to regard the prospect of Alberta separation as a more immediate concern than Quebec separation, with over one in four worried about the prospect of Alberta separation and less than one in five in the case of Quebec. Concern remains especially pronounced in Alberta itself and the fear is somewhat higher among Indigenous respondents, while Quebecers are more inclined than other Canadians to view the threat of Quebec separation with more concern. The finding arises from a survey of Canadians conducted by the firm Leger for the Association for Canadian Studies between May 15 and 17, 2026. The survey was conducted over the period 1511 respondents in Canada. The comparative survey was conducted one year earlier over the period May 1-3, 2025 with1626 respondents in Canada.

The Supreme Court of Canada at 150

On November 18, 1875, the Supreme Court of Canada was ceremonially inaugurated with a banquet at Rideau Hall hosted by the governor general of the day, Lord Dufferin. He toasted the six newly sworn justices by remarking that the establishment of the high court of the land “marks another epoch in the history of the Dominion; it exhibits another proof and pledge of the stability of our Confederation, and of the solidifying process which has knit into a homogeneous and patriotic community, the inhabitants of what a few years ago were the scattered districts of Great Britain’s North American possessions.” The 150th anniversary of the Supreme Court of Canada in 2025 invites reflection on the impact of its most influential rulings, analysis of its strengths and weaknesses, and assessments of its overall role in shaping Canadian society and identity. The occasion also offers a timely opportunity to compare Canada’s top court with that of other countrie – particularly its nearest neighbour, where the U.S. Supreme Court is so deeply enmeshed in partisan politics – and to consider the inherent tensions between political and judicial power in Canada, along with the levels of trust Canadians have in the apex body of their justice system.

Webinar Presentation: Dual Citizenship and Immigration Trends in Canada — What It Means for Us

Our latest webinar explored the latest data on immigration, including the number of new citizens, permanent residents and study permit holders. We also explored who is applying for citizenship and the growing reality of dual citizenship in Canada.​

Immigration Trends in Canada: What a deeper dive into the numbers tells us about the first half of 2025

Last October 2024, the Government of Canada announced a reduction to its permanent immigration targets to align with the country’s economic needs from 500,000 down to 395,000 in 2025; from 500,000 to 380,000 in 2026; and setting a target of 365,000 in 2027. With respect to the breakdown by categories, the economic category remained by far the largest proportion of admissions to reach some 62% by 2027. Support for family reunification continues through the family category, which maintains a rate of 22% of overall permanent resident admissions. Canada’s strong and proud tradition of offering protection to those most in need is evident through the sustained targets for Government Assisted Refugees, which contributes to the resettled refugees and protected persons category rate of 15% of overall permanent resident admissions. 21,200 admissions are provided to commitments made on humanitarian and compassionate grounds over three years (https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/news/notices/supplementary-immigration-levels-2025-2027.html) Meeting these targets is not simple given the need to account for regional priorities, pre existing commitments and other considerations. That which follows will look at the immigrant admission numbers for the first two quarters of 2025 (January 1 to June 30th ) and the initial adjustments that were made and how they compare with the admission numbers for the same two quarters over the period January 1-June 30th, 2024. There has been much speculation about whether the Government will reach the targets but much less attention directed at how it will go about doing so and what categories of immigrants will be most affected, what regions of the country will feel the impact and how it numbers in immigrant countries of origin will be shift accordingly. That which follows will provide detailed analysis of evolving migration over the first six months of 2025 and, in particular, see how they compare with the same period over the previous year.

Survey of Iranian Canadians Commissioned by AHROME and Conducted by the Metropolis Institute

The largest survey of Iranian Canadians conducted to date arrives at a critical moment, offering a timely and comprehensive snapshot of community perspectives amid heightened geopolitical tensions. It seeks to better understand how Iranian Canadians view the ongoing war, their concerns for the safety and well-being of family and friends in Iran, and their aspirations for the country’s future. The survey also explores opinions on what political, social, and structural changes are needed within Iran, as well as views on the forms of leadership that would be most representative and legitimate in guiding the country forward. Note: the document has been updated to provide a more detailed description of the survey methodology.

Fare-Well: Is the americans to Canada migration buzz About politics or demographics?

Since criteria for Canadian citizenship expanded with the passage of Bill C-3 of Canada’s Citizenship Act, millions of Americans may become eligible to claim Canadian citizenship. The amendment reverses a “first-generation” limit imposed by Canada’s Conservative government in 2009. With the change in criteria, there has been renewed ‘buzz’ about strong American interest in having what might be described as ‘Canadian residency insurance’. It’s a bit of a déjà vu as observed in the immediate aftermath of the elections of US President Trump in 2016 and again in 2024 there was much talk about Americans moving north. But there is an important gap between the purported high consideration of such exit and its actually reality. In effect, the numbers of permanent residents from the USA to Canada declined from approximately 10,800 Americans in 2023, 9, 300 in 2024 and in 2025 at 7, 520 becoming permanent residents. In 2023 US immigration data reported some 11 900 Canadians were admitted as permanent residents in that country (there are no updates since). Applications from American Citizens for PR status between 2024 and 2025 are down 10%-a reflection of a broader global decline in both admissions and applications. And the number of Americans on open work permits between 2024 and 2025 is also down-though not as much as the overall decline in open work permits. Rather than politics or ideology, economic motivation is the main driver in moves across the border by Americans and Canadians respectively.

Muslims and Jews seen as the main target for Hate and prejudice in Canada Today

A majority of Canadians believe that several of the country’s most vulnerable populations regularly encounter prejudice and hate in Canada today. These findings emerge from a survey conducted by the firm Leger for the Association for Canadian Studies to mark International day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Muslims (70%) and immigrants/refugees (68%) were most frequently identified, followed by Indigenous peoples, Black persons, Jews, and 2SLGBTQI+ individuals. While Muslims and immigrants/refugees rank somewhat higher, the weighted results suggest that the gaps between groups are not especially large, pointing to a broadly shared perception that discrimination affects multiple communities in Canada. When asked to rank groups most likely to face prejudice and discrimination, Muslims were placed first, immigrants/refugees second, and Jews third, while Indigenous peoples and Black persons were ranked lowest among those listed. The data also reveal important differences across linguistic and demographic groups, as well as a strong perceived link between prejudice against Muslims and immigrants/refugees. Overall, the results underscore persistent concerns about racism and discrimination in Canada. The findings are based on surveys conducted via web panel by the firm Leger for the Association for Canadian Studies between March 6 to 8, 2026 with 1579 Canadians.

Prejudice Towards Israelis Palestinians and Iranians in Canada

A majority of Canadians believe Israelis, Palestinians, and Iranians are likely to experience prejudice or hate in Canada, with Israelis perceived as somewhat more likely to face such treatment. A survey commissioned by the Association for Canadian Studies by the firm Leger reveal that nationally some 63% say Israelis are very or somewhat likely to encounter prejudice or hate, compared with 59% for Palestinians and 58% for Iranians. Perceptions vary across demographic groups: older Canadians are more likely than younger ones to believe these groups regularly encounter prejudice, while Quebec respondents are somewhat more likely than those in other regions to see Israelis as targets of prejudice. Canadian-born respondents are also more likely than immigrants to believe these groups face prejudice/hate. Overall, the findings suggest broad recognition among Canadians that multiple Middle Eastern–origin groups experience discrimination, with Israelis viewed as slightly more vulnerable. The findings are based on surveys conducted via web panel by the firm Leger for the Association for Canadian Studies between March 6 to 8, 2026 with 1579 Canadians.