This dissertation examines Canada's 2019–2024 Caregiver Pilots as a case study in how the Canadian state deploys immigration policy to reproduce racialized and gendered labour exploitation. Despite promising clear pathways to permanent residency, the pilots perpetuate systemic exploitation through interconnected governance mechanisms that position migrant care workers as simultaneously essential and disposable. This dissertation introduces academic muckraking as an original methodology combining critical discourse analysis, critical statistical analysis of administrative data obtained through 46 Access to Information and Privacy requests over 28 months, and collaborative participatory research with 37 migrant care workers. Grounded in Participatory Action Research and feminist political economy, this approach examines what is officially said, what administrative data reveals, and what workers experience, analyzing how Canada's immigration system maintains racialized and gendered labour hierarchies through superficial policy adjustments that obscure deeper structural inequities. Analysis of internal IRCC data reveals that as of September 2024, three months after the pilots concluded, only 2.2% of applications in the most-used stream had completed basic eligibility assessment, leaving 35,590 applicants in indefinite administrative limbo. Federal statistical frameworks systematically undercount non-permanent residents, with the 2021 Census recording a 36% missed rate, nine times the general population rate. ATIP requests for wage data for care workers on temporary permits were denied on the grounds that the data did not exist, despite those workers being required to submit wage records and pay stubs to IRCC as a condition of permanent residence eligibility. Viable sectoral bargaining frameworks proposed by care worker advocacy organizations over three decades remain unimplemented. The dissertation introduces two original concepts alongside an empirical application of an established framework. Strategic opacity describes how technical complexity, administrative fragmentation, and normalized undercounting render workers visible enough to be administered but invisible enough to evade accountability. Jurisdictional precarity names the regulatory void produced by federal-provincial fragmentation, which enables exploitation while diffusing state responsibility. Building on Schmidt et al.'s (2023) concept of bureaucratic violence, the dissertation provides the first detailed empirical demonstration of how processing delays, fluctuating application caps, and shifting eligibility criteria manufacture permanent temporariness as a designed outcome. This dissertation contributes to immigration studies, labour studies, Communication Studies, and feminist political economy through the methodology of academic muckraking, offering both substantive findings on Canada's caregiver programs and a methodological framework for investigative scholarship in contexts of institutional opacity.