cruel and unusual punishment
-
Undignified
The Supreme Court holds that life imprisonment without parole is unconstitutional. Its reasons are unconvincing. Continue reading
-
Still Wrong, Just a Little Less So
The Québec Court of Appeal errs in thinking the Charter prevents the imposition of, in effect, life imprisonment without parole Continue reading
-
Still Keeping It Complicated
The Supreme Court tries to bring more rigour to constitutional interpretation and takes a step towards textualism, but won’t admit it Continue reading
-
You Read It Here First
The Supreme Court holds that the Charter does not protect corporations against cruel and unusual punishment Continue reading
-
Throwing Away the Key
Thoughts on life imprisonment without parole, in New Zealand and in Canada Continue reading
-
Counter-Rebellion
Judges of the Alberta Court of Appeal question the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on mandatory minimum sentences Continue reading
-
Does the Constitution Mean Anything?
In defence of textualism in constitutional interpretation Continue reading
-
Climb Out!
The Québec Court of Appeal errs in holding that corporations are protected against cruel and unusual punishment Continue reading
-
Sentencing Judgment Found Inside a Chinese Fortune Cookie
The sentencing judgment in the Québec City mosque shooter’s case is badly flawed Continue reading
-
No Big Deal?
I wrote recently about a decision of the Ontario Court of Justice, R. v. Michael, 2014 ONCJ 360, which held that the “victim surcharge” imposed in addition to any other punishment on any person found guilty of an offence is, in its current, mandatory, form unconstitutional, because it amounted to a cruel and unusual punishment Continue reading
Double Aspect 