-
Adequate Alternatives
Last week, the Supreme Court issued an interesting decision which, although apparently only concerned with judicial review (of the administrative law sort) and the respective jurisdiction of the Federal and superior courts, also tells us something about the role of the courts more generally. The case, Strickland v. Canada (Attorney General), 2015 SCC 37, was an…
-
Farewell, Hercules and the Umpire!
I blogged about Richard G. Kopf’s Hercules and the Umpire, a couple of years ago, when I first discovered it. Its author is a senior (in Canada, we would say “supernumerary” ― but I think “senior” sounds better) federal district judge in the District of Nebraska. I wrote, at the time, that Judge Kopf “is…
-
The Uber Decision
Last week, Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice delivered a much noticed judgment rejecting Toronto’s claims that Uber could not operate there without registering and obtaining a license as a taxicab or limousine broker. Needless to say, the ruling is of great practical importance to Uber’s users, both passengers and drivers, as well as those who seek to regulate…
-
What Were They Smoking?
Last week, the Supreme Court held that the prohibition on medical marijuana products intended to be ingested or applied as creams ― as opposed to dried medical marijuana for the purposes of smoking, for which a permission can be granted ― is arbitrary and, therefore, not in accordance with principles of fundamental justice, in violation of s. 7 of the…
-
Happy 800th, Magna Carta!
Today is the 800th anniversary of the signing of the Magna Carta Libertatum ― or just the Magna Carta, among friends. The Great Charter has been much celebrated, and also derided, of late. In the New York Times, Sarah Lyall does an excellent job of summarizing the competing perspectives. The celebrations tend to emphasize Magna Carta’s…
-
The Harm in a Hate Speech Bill
Last week, I criticized Québec’s Bill 59, which would notably introduce a very broad prohibition on “hate speech” in provincial law. This morning, the CBA National Magazine’s blog publishes an English version of some of my criticisms, focusing on one of the bill’s unique aspects, the inclusion of “political convictions” in the list of “prohibited…
-
Une note aux lecteurs ― A Note to Readers
(English follows) Une petite note à l’intention de mes lecteurs racistes, islamophobes ou antisémites, et en particuliers à ceux qui semblent être devenus mes fans depuis que j’ai publié un billet dénonçant le projet de loi québécois visant à interdire le « discours haineux »: ce n’est pas parce que je défends votre liberté d’expression que j’ai envie…
-
Inutile ou inconstitutionnel?
En plus de s’attaquer à la liberté d’expression et à la primauté du droit avec leur projet de loi 59, le gouvernement du Québec et la ministre de la justice, Stéphanie Vallée, s’attaquent peut-être aussi à la liberté de religion avec le projet de loi 62. Peut-être, car ce texte législatif contient une exception qui pourrait en…
-
Un gâchis
La ministre de la justice du Québec, Stéphanie Vallée, a déposée à l’Assemblée nationale le Projet de loi 59 qui va ajouter une interdiction de « discours haineux » à la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne (alias la Charte québécoise) et aussi, entre autres, astreindre les écoles et les CÉGEPs à protéger…
Double Aspect 