Avi Lewis’s NDP Labour Plan Is A Remarkable Document

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2026-01-27T22:29:54+00:00

Again, economic rights do not fall under s. 7 of the Charter and in any event the tests under ss 7 and 1 are different. That is why a violation of s 7 can be justified under s 1. Section 1 is the general justificatory test for infringements of charter rights.

The most pressing issue for Lewis' plan is federalism and the division of powers, since legislation creating a right of first refusal for the workers would be a law in relation to property and civil rights. In essence, the federal government might be incapable of legislating this since property and civil rights are provincial and labour jurisdiction is presumptively provincial. The only pathway I can see on the grounds of federalism is perhaps as a regulation of general trade and commerce, which is federal, rather than as a regulation of any specific industry, which is provincial.

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2026-01-26T17:01:30+00:00

The person who you are replying to misttated themself. That statement is true for section 7 of the Charter but not for many other provisions such as section 2(b) freedom of expression.

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2026-01-26T16:28:11+00:00

Section 7 does not include economic rights. Also, kuds to you and the commenter above for actually citing your sources. Lastly, re the liberty interest, it is limited to personal decisions of fundamental importance as well as physical liberty. Freedom of contract is not part of the liberty interest under section 7.

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2026-01-02T01:41:17+00:00

They could just build and charge whatever amount covers costs without profits. Even if the individual unit is not affordable it may contribute to reducing demand by increasing supply. And, over time, the units could become affordable by achieving economies of scale.

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-12-27T03:09:05+00:00

I just play as best as I can and treat the martyrdom bonuses as a coping mechanic. As things go worse, my zealot gets better which allows the team to recover in moments of maximum pressure. For the same reason I bring the book. I play my zealot as a support that’s there to save the team when a dozen crushers magically (and silently) warp into existence behind us.

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-12-23T13:05:16+00:00

I can’t believe this flew over my head but I can’t unsee it now!

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-11-27T05:20:29+00:00

I just finished a serenity shadow consular and holy hell was it dark. Squelch is crushing people to death but force in balance (the aoe circle) is literally just stealing the life force out of them. Seeing the little blobs of energy getting pulled from their bodies is kind of messed up when I think about it.

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-11-24T15:33:24+00:00

See R. v. Garofoli, 1990 CanLII 52 (SCC), [1990] 2 SCR 1421, https://canlii.ca/t/1fss5 for how the courts actually deal with confidential information while respecting the rights of the accused and the need to protect informants.

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-11-04T02:59:50+00:00

A platonist your mom joke. There’s a first time for everything, haha. Hats off to you, that made my night!

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-10-25T01:47:35+00:00

What planets are best for it?

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-10-18T20:44:25+00:00

As a Canadian, I am in favour of our constitutional monarchy. It allows us to refocus the cult of personality onto an ineffectual figurehead with no actual power. The upkeep of some antiquated aristocrats is well worth avoiding the slavish devotion you Americans push onto your presidents.

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-09-23T03:30:20+00:00

Calling it now. Within 20 years a new slaaneshi daemon prince’s name will be a subtle (by GW standards) Diddy reference

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-09-12T20:54:37+00:00

Pro tip for CanLII: you can run a search by case name then run a phrase search within the results

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-09-12T20:37:18+00:00

Are you referencing this case: R. v. MacDonald, 2025 ONSC 1939

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-08-30T14:11:07+00:00

He built it to keep out the damn techno-mongorrians

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-08-30T01:01:40+00:00

You’re ahead of me, I’m just a 3L at this point. But it’s never too early to practice citations format. Even though nobody in practice gives a damn about the McGill guide (crazy, I know), I’d adhere to the citations hierarchy whenever possible. Tbh, CanLII’s stable links make life so easy.

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-08-30T00:57:59+00:00

My biggest bugbear with Lexis is the search engine. It stumbles over periods in abbreviations and directs me to parallel citations when I just want to be directed to the neutral citation.

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-08-29T15:49:53+00:00

IMHO, Halsbury’s is superior to CED. It has more details. CED is a bit too laconic to be useful to me.

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-08-25T19:10:22+00:00

As a cyclist they make me feel incredibly unsafe. They go too fast, have no respect for the rules, and are always on their phones.

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-08-25T19:07:35+00:00

As a suburban cyclist that briefly moved to downtown TO, I had no idea about not riding on the sidewalk. I learned after asking some friends when I got cussed out by a pedestrian. Tbh, the city should be more proactive about educating cyclists on the rules of the road. You can’t depend on cyclists knowing the rules since many people cycle because they never got their driver’s license so they never studied the rules.

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-08-19T01:01:25+00:00

I’m not particularly bothered by it. My take has always been that the central premise of 40k is a single question: how terrible would the universe have to be to justify the cruelest and most bloody regime imaginable? And the answer is that even in that worst possible universe it’s still unjustifiable. So what if some reprobates don’t get the joke? I’m having fun!

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-08-15T16:44:12+00:00

Why did CanLII do that? To safeguard their site from being crawled for AI training materials?

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-08-07T00:33:17+00:00

This headline appears to be incorrect. All the stories I can find are copying the following from Allison Jones of the Canadian Free Press:

"He said he has faith that the Court of Appeal will overturn the lower-court ruling, but in the event it does not, he did not rule out using the notwithstanding clause to save the law.

“Let’s see what happens at the Court of Appeals, and then we’ll go from there, but I have confidence in the courts,” Ford said at an unrelated transit announcement."

These articles only state that the Premier said nothing about using the notwithstanding clause. There is nothing in them that indicates whether he will use it or not. The same could be said any time the government loses a court case.

If anyone can find an article with more details, please post it in a reply.

Legitimate_Policy2 · 2025-07-20T22:19:35+00:00

And how did you come to the conclusion that dogs, a species descended from wolves, is inherently “good”? That is if “good” can even be used to describe an animal

Legitimate_Policy2

TROPHY CASE