This paper analyzes the forms of legitimation of Canadian federalism in relation to the Rawlsian notion of overlapping consensus as applied to federalism by Wayne Norman. From the works of Dimitrios Karmis and Alain-G. Gagnon, the paper presents three types of federalism: universalist, communitarian and utilitarian, which are discussed in relation to the constitutional situation after the repatriation of the Constitution in 1982 and the Trudeau model. These three approaches to federalism are subsequently applied to the case study of immigration policies and their decentralization. Through the example of these policies the article shows that, even if from a constitutional point of view there is a lack of overlapping consensus on the principles of the federation, certain aspects of the reforms that were part of the failed Meech Lake (1988) and Charlottetown (1992) agreements have been rescued out of the Constitution. This allows for the conclusion that the Canadian federation’s modus vivendi allows for its institutional functioning but is far from satisfying the ideal overlapping consensus, which could only emerge out from a multinational pact.