-
A Dissent on Mainville
Readers may recall that last summer, when the issue of the constitutionality of Justice Mainville’s appointment to the Québec Court of Appeal was raised, Maxime St-Hilaire argued that the appointment was unconstitutional. First the Québec Court of Appeal and now the Supreme Court have ruled that Justice Mainville’s appointment was indeed constitutional, as I argued in response…
-
Fear-Mongering
Irwin Cotler has table a private member’s bill, C-669, that would give judges the ability to reduce any mandatory minimum sentence provided by the Criminal Code in any manner that [the judge] considers just and reasonable, taking into consideration the circumstances of the offence, victim and offender, the sentencing principles set out in [the Code], and…
-
This Time It’s Different
Today, the Supreme Court heard Québec’s appeal in l’Affaire Mainville ― and, after deliberating for less than an hour, dismissed it from the bench. Speaking for the Court, Justice Wagner endorsed the reasons of the Québec Court of Appeal in Renvoi sur l’article 98 de la Loi constitutionnelle de 1867 (Dans l’affaire du), 2014 QCCA 2365 (an…
-
Entrenching and Expanding Rights
In an interesting post over at Concurring Opinions, Renee Lerner discusses the history of the constitutional protection for trial by jury, including in civil cases, in the United States, and suggests that this history holds a cautionary lesson. Prof. Lerner highlights the importance which the common law heritage and the purported “immemorial” “rights of Englishmen” associated with it had…
-
Untenable
The Supreme Court will hear the oral arguments in l’Affaire Mainville this Friday. The issue in this case concerns the eligibility of Federal Court judges appointed from Québec, and thus former members of the Québec bar, for seats on Québec’s s. 96 Courts, pursuant to s. 98 of the Constitution Act, 1867, which provides that…
-
Is the Charter Really Democratic?
Andrew Coyne had an excellent column in the National Post for the 30th anniversary of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which only came across after he re-shared it this week. (Indeed, I had originally thought it was published this week, but he has corrected me. Apologies!) Mr. Coyne argued that the Charter must be seen as…
-
Their Eminences
Commenting on the Supreme Court’s recent decision striking down a mandatory minimum sentence in R. v. Nur, 2015 SCC 15 in the National Post, John Ivison joins the list of commentators lamenting the Supreme Court’s “political” decision-making. The dissent by Justice Moldaver, joined by Justices Rothstein and Wagner, makes him say that [w]hen three such eminent…
Double Aspect 