Not Reserving Judgment

On Episode 31, we tell you about the firing of an Ontario librarian whose apparent crime was trying to diversify the collection; we walk you through a heart-breaking decision by a Calgary judge to allow a woman with autism to access assisted-death over her father's objections, and we share our new polling that shows Canadians are ready for major change on health care. Stories and cases discussed in this week's episode:Most Canadians want ‘major changes’ to healthcare system new research findsCalgary judge rules woman with autism can seek Medical Assistance in DyingPremier Ford clarifies fourplex comments despite insisting it would be a ‘disaster’Niagara-on-the-Lake library board fires CEO Cathy Simpson Monica Harris: The unjust firing of Ontario librarian who challenged DEI orthodoxyHermes faces US lawsuit over ‘refusal’ to sell Birkin bag Manitoba PCs say bill banning anti-abortion protests near clinics should be expandedNot Reserving Judgment is a podcast about Canadian constitutional law hosted by Josh Dehaas, Joanna Baron, and Christine Van Geyn.The show is brought to you by the Canadian Constitution Foundation, a non-partisan legal charity dedicated to defending rights and freedoms. To support our work, visit theccf.ca/donate.

On Episode 30, we explain why a proposed bylaw in Vaughan aimed at controlling hateful protests outside synagogues raises red flags; we explain the costs order made against an activist group defending dangerous encampments in Edmonton; plus we share our Bad Legal Takes of the Week.Stories and cases discussed in this week's episode:Advocacy group to pay City of Edmonton more than $11K in costs after failed encampment lawsuitSection 176(2) of the Criminal CodeVaughan mayor seeks to ban protests at schools, religious institutionsProtecting Vaughan’s places of worship, schools, childcare facilities and our hospital (Vaughan news release)Westendorp v. the Queen, 1983 CanLII 1 (SCC)Coalition for Justice and Human Rights Ltd v Edmonton (City), 2024 ABKB 148 (CanLII)Kingston to start enforcing daytime camping ban in city parksThe Supreme Court of Canada went viral for what it didn’t say about ‘a woman’A Q&A with U of T’s new adviser on civil discourse, Randy BoyagodaNot Reserving Judgment is a podcast about Canadian constitutional law hosted by Josh Dehaas, Joanna Baron, and Christine Van Geyn.The show is brought to you by the Canadian Constitution Foundation, a non-partisan legal charity dedicated to defending rights and freedoms. To support our work, visit theccf.ca/donate.

On Episode 29, we tell you about a labour arbitrator decision that found a vaccine mandate that led to 10 nurses being fired from their jobs was unreasonable; we go through the Supreme Court decision that found the state needs judicial authorization to get your Internet Protocol address; and we tell you about a proposed bylaw that would ban "graphic" anti-abortion signs.Stories and cases discussed in this week's episode:City council votes to move ahead with ban on graphic protest signsR. v. BykovetsPolice need search warrant to get IP address, rules Supreme Court of Canada in 5-4 split decisionOnline sex abuse: Accused Ontario med student avoids extradition to U.S.Arbitrator rules in favour of Ont. nurses fired for refusing COVID vaccinesQuinte Health v Ontario Nurses Association, 2024 CanLII 14991 (ON LA)Not Reserving Judgment is a podcast about Canadian constitutional law hosted by Josh Dehaas, Joanna Baron, and Christine Van Geyn.The show is brought to you by the Canadian Constitution Foundation, a non-partisan legal charity dedicated to defending rights and freedoms. To support our work, visit theccf.ca/donate.

On Episode 28, we give you an update on the criminal charges dropped against two men arrested at Coutts, Alberta in February 2022, and the civil lawsuits launched by trucker convoy participants; we explain the ruling that says Quebec's secularism law Bill 21 is fully shielded from judicial review by the notwithstanding clause; and we explain the interesting inter-provincial trade angle in a lawsuit from McGill and Concordia against the province's tuition structure.Stories and cases discussed in this week's episode:The HateGate Affair: Unmasking Canada's Hate Industry (by Caryma S'ad)Gwyn Morgan: Truckers get jail time while real criminals get bail and parole'Freedom Convoy' organizer from Sask. suing federal government for using Emergencies Act to freeze accountsQuebec Appeal Court Bill 21 ruling fuels debate on notwithstanding clauseMcGill, Concordia file lawsuits demanding Quebec cancel tuition hikePalestinian Canadians sue Foreign Minister Joly over arms exports to IsraelMANDEL: Luka Magnotta now in same medium-security prison as fellow killer Paul BernardoNot Reserving Judgment is a podcast about Canadian constitutional law hosted by Josh Dehaas, Joanna Baron, and Christine Van Geyn.The show is brought to you by the Canadian Constitution Foundation, a non-partisan legal charity dedicated to defending rights and freedoms. To support our work, visit theccf.ca/donate.

Delve into the controversial Online Harms Act and its far-reaching implications for free expression in Canada. The proposed legislation threatens to impose hefty fines for 'harmful' speech while expanding the powers of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. Experts voice concerns over the chilling effects on open dialogue and the subjective nature of hate speech definitions. The discussion also critiques media portrayal surrounding online protection, raising vital questions about the balance between user safety and censorship.

On Episode 26, we tell you about the debate over whether the judge hearing the challenge to the Saskatchewan gender pronouns policy is allowed to make a declaration now that the notwithstanding clause has been invoked; we explain our application to intervene in the federal plastics appeal; and we tell you what we've heard about the upcoming "online harms" and hate speech bill.Stories and cases discussed in this week's episode:Disinformation Law Is Dead Dérives sectaires : on vous explique le délit de "provocation à l'abstention de soins", voté par l'Assemblée nationale Yes, the feds can actually override provincial anti-trans school policies. Here's how.School closures may not have been necessary to prevent spread of COVID-19, researchers at McMaster findCan job postings in Canada exclude white people? Short answer: yes Judge rules challenge of Saskatchewan’s pronoun law can proceedJosh Dehaas: P.E.I. puts politeness over free speech by persecuting town councillorThe Evolving Debate Over Section 33 of the Charter The faulty received wisdom around the notwithstanding clause The Notwithstanding Clause: Legislatures, Courts, and the ElectorateThe Truck and the Brakes: Understanding the Charter's Limitations and Notwithstanding Clauses SymmetricallyNot Reserving Judgment is a podcast about Canadian constitutional law hosted by Josh Dehaas, Joanna Baron, and Christine Van Geyn.The show is brought to you by the Canadian Constitution Foundation, a non-partisan legal charity dedicated to defending rights and freedoms. To support our work, visit theccf.ca/donate.

On Episode 25, we explain why last week's Supreme Court decision on Indigenous child welfare preserves an important constitutional principle; we walk you through the Federal Court's feisty opinion declaring that cabinet is breaching a constitutional convention by not appointing enough judges; and we discuss our theories on why the Supreme Court is deciding so few cases these days.Stories and cases discussed in this week's episode:Reference re An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and familiesTwo more provinces join in opposition to gun buyback program that 'unnecessarily targets lawful gun owners'Hameed v. Canada (Prime Minister) (Federal Court decision on judicial vacancies)Federal Court rules Ottawa failed constitutional duty to fill judicial vacanciesSCC’s output fell to 34 judgments in 2023, renewing questions, concerns within the barJudge overturns convictions of B.C. woman, accused of coughing on grocery workerChristine's tweet about the CBC Kids story on Emergencies Act decisionPaul Champ's tweet criticizing the Ottawa Police ServiceNot Reserving Judgment is a podcast about Canadian constitutional law hosted by Josh Dehaas, Joanna Baron, and Christine Van Geyn.The show is brought to you by the Canadian Constitution Foundation, a non-partisan legal charity dedicated to defending rights and freedoms. To support our work, visit theccf.ca/donate.

On Episode 24, we tell you about a Montreal police officer who says he was demoted for an anonymous $20 donation to the Freedom Convoy; we explain the Supreme Court decision that found Ontario Premier Doug Ford was not required to give CBC his mandate letters; and we tell you about Supreme Court Judge Malcolm Rowe's provocative speech at the Runnymede Society conference.Stories and cases discussed in this week's episode:Windsor police officer appeals conviction for donating to Freedom ConvoyHub Exclusive: Supreme Court Justice Malcolm Rowe on postmodernism, democracy, and judicial overreach Un cadre du SPVM s’estime lésé après un don au Convoi de la liberté Écarté pour un don au mouvement des camionneurs Ontario (Attorney General) v. Ontario (Information and Privacy Commissioner)Supreme Court rules Premier Doug Ford's mandate letters to be kept secretJennifer Koshan tweetExploring the Link between Crime and Socio-Economic Status in Ottawa and Saskatoon: A Small-Area Geographical AnalysisThe Scourge of His Convictions (David Moscrop)Nora Loreto tweetNot Reserving Judgment is a podcast about Canadian constitutional law hosted by Josh Dehaas, Joanna Baron, and Christine Van Geyn.The show is brought to you by the Canadian Constitution Foundation, a non-partisan legal charity dedicated to defending rights and freedoms. To support our work, visit theccf.ca/donate.

Implications of Nunavut transferring control to the Inuit. Indigenous veto on B.C. land decisions. Concerns about cybersecurity law. New York City mayor calls social media an 'environmental toxin'. Ontario youth challenge climate change plan in court.

The hosts discuss a landmark decision by the Federal Court of Canada that found Trudeau illegally invoked the Emergencies Act. They analyze the arguments made by the Attorney General and highlight Justice Mosley's rejection of deference to the executive. They talk about winning a landmark case and the court's surprising decision. They discuss Trudeau's use of the Emergencies Act and the freezing of bank accounts. They analyze the federal judge's decision on the act and its nationwide applicability.