-
Not Established
I wrote in my last post about a brief recently submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court arguing that an act of Congress which exempts religious believers from the application of any law that interferes with their religious beliefs and practices unless the law is the least restrictive means to realize a compelling government objective is…
-
Room for Disagreement
The issue of the respective roles of courts and legislatures in defending ― and defining ― individual rights and liberties is a controversial one. Some, like Jeremy Waldron, argue that protecting rights is the legislatures’ job, at least in the last resort. Others, like Dahlia Lithwick and Sonja West, apparently believe that rights are the exclusive preserve…
-
Le voile et le cadenas
Depuis une dizaine de jours, les défenseurs de la Charte de la honte, au premier chef Bernard Drainville, qui en est le ministre responsable, semblent avoir trouvé une nouvelle justification pour leur projet: la lutte à l’intégrisme. M. Drainville prétend désormais que, si on est contre l’intégrisme, on doit être pour la charte, qui serait selon…
-
Pas trop mal
Radio-Canada rapporte que le Parti libéral du Québec a annoncé sa (nouvelle) position sur les symboles religieux dans la fonction publique. Beaucoup moins répressive que celle du Parti québécois, incarnée dans la Charte de la Honte (que j’ai critiquée à répétition), elle n’en souffre pas moins de certaines incohérences, et n’est pas aussi libérale qu’elle…
-
A Shield Not a Sword?
In my post discussing Brent Rathgeber’s take on the Supreme Court’s recent decision striking down the prostitution-related provisions of the Criminal Code (Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, 2013 SCC 72), I mentioned that Mr. Rathgeber had an interesting theory of the proper role of courts and judicial review. I think it is worth discussing, but I do not…
-
Intelligent Life on Parliament Hill
In an interesting recent blog post, Brent Rathgeber, an independent MP, discusses the Supreme Court’s decision in Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, 2013 SCC 72, and Parliament’s eventual response to it. Mr. Rathgeber’s post deserves attention for a number of reasons. Beyond its immediate subject, which is of course interesting in itself, it is relevant to the debate about…
-
Not So Super Majorities
We all want to live under good constitutions… whatever good really means. But how do we make sure that our constitution is, in fact, good? In a post at the Volokh Conspiracy (part of a series discussing their book on originalism), John McGinnis and Michael Rappaport argue that that “stringent supe[r]majority rules provide the best…
-
Friends Like These
In my comment on the Supreme Court’s decision striking down the Criminal Code’s provisions on prostitution, Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, 2013 SCC 72, I expressed concern about the Court’s reliance on “legislative facts” ― that is, the social context in which the impugned legislation operates ― to resolve the case, and especially its holding that a trial judge’s…
Double Aspect 