I've never said this publicly, because I'm naturally private, but I suffer from depression. I have for many years, since I was 18. I know, by now, how to handle it. But as time has gone on, I've grown increasingly angry with the remaining stigma associated with this illness. /1
@mattgurney
Does anyone else find it...sad? That a political sock puppet was actually a voice in Cdn political commentary? Come on. We need to look at ourselves a bit.
All of this to say, I think the answer starts with all of us. We need to pressure politicians to listen. We need to, internally, address the stigma-driven reaction that many of us still have towards mental illness. I only hope that disclosing my story will help in some small way
Why? Because my theory is that the stigma leads to the underfunded, patchwork mental health system we have in our country. Too many people fall through the cracks, or don't have the connections to navigate what is supposed to be the best public healthcare system in the world /2.
Canada v Kattenburg, 2020 FCA 164: an excellent set of reasons from Stratas JA. I particularly want to highlight his comments on the role of judges (see below). Notably, judges should not grant "benediction" to their own personal views. Stratas JA also cites a blog post of mine.
But, for many, it is a life and death matter. People who are already hopeless have a hard time staying positive when they need to wait months to see a psychiatrist, or when others simply do not understand or denigrate the condition /4.
But we should do better. I don't have the solution. Part of the answer must be reducing the stigma and directing political attention to our healthcare system in this particular area. This will be hard, since politicians rarely discuss the quality of Cdn public healthcare. /3
I want to send a message to those suffering from mental illness, especially now. Do not fault yourself when you see Twitter posts bragging about productivity. People with mental illnesses are fighting a daily battle. We don't have time to bake bread everyday /1
The Rule of Law is a central organizing principle of Canada's constitutional order. It is more important than ever. That's why
@RunnymedeSoc
and
@ARLCanada
have launched the annual Dicey Law Review. We will feature short pieces on the RoL from all perspectives.
Happy to get the news today that I won a Canadian Law Blog Award
#clawbies2019
for "Best Bloggers on a Platform or Shared Blog." Thanks for the nominations, and congrats to all of the other winners. Happy New Year!
Some personal news, as they say. I will be taking over as National Director of the
@RunnymedeSoc
in the coming months. Many thanks to
@jobearon
for her successful stewardship of the org over the last number of years. Big shoes to fill, but I am looking forward to it!
Big congrats to
@MarkPMancini
, our new National Director. Mark was a founding chapter president at the University of NB and has distinguished himself as an eloquent and prominent young legal academic in places such as the
@DoubleAspect
blog.
To some, the long wait times are just the price to pay. The moment we accept this is the moment we accept public policy failure. If only we had politicians with the courage to face this epidemic head on, probably made worse by COVID. /5
For those interested, Justice David Stratas has updated his amazing administrative law slides to take account of Vavilov. Well-worth the read for those interested in how Vavilov will play out.
Today is my first official day as National Director of the
@RunnymedeSoc
. Looking forward to working with students to promote debate on ideas relating to the rule of law, constitutionalism, and individual liberty!
Curious about Runnymede? Check out:
This whole thing is embarrassing for Canada. Political staff leading the charge, in the face of a PM that apparently doesn't know any better, with former Supreme Court judges acting as surrogates. It's parochial in the worst way, and one hopes that just desserts are served.
Very excited that my paper, "The Conceptual Gap Between Doré and Vavilov" will be published in the
@DalhousieLJ
in the fall! The paper tackles Doré head on as inconsistent with the schools of thought underpinning Vavilov.
@Publicwrongs
@EmmMacfarlane
I am an alumnus of Laurentian. This is tragic and pitiful. The people of that university do not deserve this--they are paying the price for years of incompetence at management level.
#Vavilov
: In my view, I am quite pleased and surprised. The biggest change is the recognition of statutory rights of appeal as attracting correctness review. Blog post to come.
For those interested in admin law, the Dunsmuir redux, or anyone who thinks Canadian admin law is madness: the final copy of my paper "Two Myths of Administrative Law" is now published in the Western Journal of Legal Studies:
I wrote my impressions up of
#Vavilov
. My overall take is that the decision is a step forward for the law of judicial review in Canada, particularly when it comes to selecting the standard of review /1
Does anyone else think the academic ballooning in Canada of qualifications is justified? I'm seriously asking. Is a PhD (or JSD) necessary as a "hoop" to jump through? Why do we insist on this?
New post: my short thoughts on why Ontario's "search and destroy" style bar exam is disconnected from any apparent regulatory goals. What is the regulatory justification for this ritual?
In what must surely be a mistake, the Federal Court of Appeal cited a number of pieces of mine in a recent case: Bell, 2018 FCA 174. All are about the problems with the standard of review framework in administrative law.
For those interested, my (pre-publication) paper on Doré's inconsistency with Vavilov is now on SSRN. The paper was accepted for publication at the Dalhousie Law Journal.
We are so excited to host
@CassSunstein
for our
@RunnymedeSoc
Speaker Series. Prof Sunstein will be speaking on his book, "How Change Happens." A very apt topic for the moment in which we live. Mark your calendars for July 16 at 12pm EDT. Registration will open soon!
I've seen lots of initiatives on Twitter for current lawyers to help existing law students. I am happy to provide help to any current law students who need advice about articling, clerking, etc. While I am a fairly new lawyer, I hope I can help someone in these trying times.
Honoured by this citation in 2020 FCA 100 (Stratas JA). More importantly, this case properly construes the limited role of international law in our constitutional framework, while highlighting the importance of text in its purposive context as the driver of interpretation.
“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.”
— Mitch McConnell, March 2016.
Just got the prints of my new paper in the Canadian Journal of Administrative Law and Practice. My paper focuses on the reference going to the
@SCC_eng
on the jurisdiction of the Court of Quebec.
I don't say this often, but the SCC came out with a *great* decision today on statutory interpretation grounds: Telus Communications v Wellman. The decision is notable for its rejection of highly abstract purposes, and its focus on text.
/1
THREAD: On
@RunnymedeSoc
and recent discussions on Twitter about the purpose and structure of our organization. As National Director, I have made it my mission to open the doors of Runnymede to people of all ideologies. The rub: we are all committed to free and open debate.
I have three forthcoming papers on administrative law topics coming out in 2020. I have uploaded drafts to SSRN. Topics include the potential presence of a non-delegation doctrine in Canada; and analyses of various facets of Vavilov, including its inconsistency with Doré
My article on constitutional remedies and declarations of invalidity in superior courts was just released in
@CentreConstStud
's Constitutional Forum. Check it out here:
We had our
@RunnymedeSoc
conference this weekend. It was a success. I'd like to take a moment to thank
@Wakephillips
, Adam Revay,
@jobearon
and
@briandnbird
for all of their help and support on putting this event together. We are also grateful to all of our attendees!
My FC clerkship was where my passion for administrative law blossomed. I learned so much, and worked with such amazing colleagues. I would recommend this clerkship to anyone.
If you want expert analysis of these decisions right after they are released,
@RunnymedeSoc
will be releasing a special episode of our podcast, Runnymede Radio, with
@pauldalyesq
on Friday, December 20 to discuss the decisions and what they mean!
Administrative law is a form of control over the diffuse administrative state. This is important for the vulnerable. Today's decision, requiring a culture of justification for administrative power, seems to add a restriction on that power that will help the vulnerable.
Tomorrow begins the three-day oral argument in in the
@SCC_eng
's standard of review cases. Thread on why this opportunity matters--and why we deserve better than what the SCC has done before /1
New post: The Rule of Law requires a system of courts enforcing the law; so failing to abide by injunctions imperils the Rule of Law. But this cannot be the end of the matter: Indigenous self-government should be constitutionally recognized.
Very happy that I will be teaching a section of the "atelier d'intégration" at
@UdeMCommonLaw
in the Winter Semester. I love working with students and so I'm pleased with the opportunity.
We are very excited to host Justice Malcolm Rowe of the Supreme Court of Canada for our Law and Freedom Conference in March, 2021. Stay tuned for more details.
Nothing to say right now, except it's a disgraceful attack on institutions and the democratic process five years in the making, supported and encouraged by the GOP.
I am so puzzled by those results-oriented folks who think living constitutionalism will always lead to progressive results, and that opposition to it is "conservative." Armed with living constitutionalism, conservative judges can just as easily advance their policy preferences.
In 1979, the SCC said the Rule of Law runs within prison walls. True during the pandemic?
@DebraParkes
will explore the pandemic in prisons in a
@RunnymedeSoc
talk entitled "Imprisoned in a Pandemic: Rights, Release, and Resistance." Aug 20, 12pm ET.
We at the
@RunnymedeSoc
are pleased to announce that Justice Suzanne Côté will be speaking at a Runnymede event at the
@uOttawa
on February 26, 2020. Justice Côté will speak on independence and collegiality at the Supreme Court. We are excited to host the talk.
It was a pleasure to co-author this paper with
@GeoffSigalet
on the principles that should govern the activities of former judges. Forthcoming in 2021 in the
@queensulaw
Journal. Thanks to all for support on this paper, a year and a half in the making!
Very excited to be lecturing in
@alexandraeflynn
's
@AllardLaw
Administrative Law class next week, providing the students with an introduction to statutory interpretation--exciting these days.
Check out my piece on recent developments here:
Join us on Thursday June 11th for the next conversation in our Summer Speaker Series, featuring Justice David Stratas of the Federal Court of Appeal.
Registration for the Zoom session is here -- don't miss out!
As far as I am concerned,
@RunnymedeSoc
is designed to advance the bounds of debate. No more, no less. This means presenting viewpoints from people that might not be typically seen on law school campuses.
Both the article and the "insider" responses to it are interesting. My own experience is that
@RunnymedeSoc
sends mixed signals about whether it wants to expand the bounds of law school debate or advance a more specific ideological agenda.
Tomorrow is the release of Vavilov and Bell/NFL. If you need a summary of the cases, the arguments made by the parties, and my analysis, take a look at these two posts:
It is a significant day!
On that note, I'd like to bring us back to what started all of this: the future of legal education and curriculum. And in the spirit of open debate, I'd like to invite
@Honickman
and
@JoshuaSealy
to debate this topic, on terms to be discussed, at an RS event in the fall.
Canada is a great country. Any patriot will also acknowledge that Canada has problems. Let's use Canada Day to recognize why so many--including my grandparents--chose Canada as a country in which to live. Let's celebrate our institutions. Let's resolve to make Canada better.
This is great! I also want to point out that
@SCC_eng
clerkships are not the only game in town. Clerking at the Federal Court honed my passion for administrative law, and I know many who had similar experiences at the FCA. These clerkships can be just as (if not more) valuable.
My recent paper arguing that Vavilov and Dore are inconsistent is now available on the
@DalhousieLJ
website. Thanks to editors and peer reviewers for their help.
ICYMI: My piece, to be published in the Advocates' Quarterly, on Justice Stratas' recent statutory interpretation cases.
"Statutory Interpretation from the Stratasphere: Recent Federal Court of Appeal Cases"
Excellent piece from
@MarkPMancini
: "Text is the method by which purpose is achieved by the legislature; purpose defined by the court does not dictate text."
If you get out of bed today, that's a win. If you can do some work, even better. But some days you will do nothing, and that's okay too. We each must find our way given our lot in life. And for those with mental illness, our lot is to simply do the best we can /2
Great first class at
@UdeMCommonLaw
today, but I get what all the profs are talking about: zoom lecturing is weird, not ideal, and takes a "particular set of skills." On to the next!
This week I am headed to Thunder Bay from YVR for a great
@RunnymedeSoc
event with
@adamgoldenberg
and
@ryan_p_alford
. As a Northern Ontarian, it will be great to be back in the North to hear these great speakers!
Bad photo given the lighting, but we had an amazing
@RunnymedeSoc
event
@uocommonlaw
with Justice Côté tonight on independence and collegiality at the
@SCC_eng
. Great turnout and an even better talk.
The original sin was in 2016. The second sin will be in 2020. The third sin would be packing the court, politicizing the institution even further. Someone will have to step down here in the name of law (rather than politics). I have no hope this will happen.
If McConnell and Senate push through a justice to replace RBG — after insisting on the principle that election year vacancies should be decided by the voters in 2016—there will be a unified front of Democrats in favor of court-packing.