Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Digital Commons Network

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network

The Charter And Anglophone Legal Theory, Part I, Richard F. Devlin Frsc Jan 1997

The Charter And Anglophone Legal Theory, Part I, Richard F. Devlin Frsc

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has generated not only new terrain over which discursive positions are mobilized, but it has catalysed theoretical reflection about law, society, state, and the self. Examining the implications of the Charter for Anglophone legal theory, the author conducts both a qualitative and quantitative survey of jurisprudential work on the Charter and concludes that the Charter's impact on legal theory has been significant. The Charter has prompted expansion of the range of interdisciplinary influences, contextualized theoretical reflection, and made jurisprudence more engaged with and relevant to Canadian social life. The Charter also has facilitated …


Intent And Incoherence, Sheila R. Foster Jan 1997

Intent And Incoherence, Sheila R. Foster

Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, Professor Sheila Foster dissects the intent standard in equal protection jurisprudence, filtering it through the lens of democratic process theory. Most legal scholars and commentators writing in this area continuously restate, and critique, the "rule" of intent as a uniform standard in constitutional law. However, it is clear from the Supreme Court's jurisprudence (and that of the lower federal courts) that different levels of consciousness can satisfy the discriminatory intent standard, and hence violate the Equal Protection Clause. Exactly what explains these disparate, and seemingly incoherent, levels of intent is the subject of this Article. Professor Foster …


Intent And Incoherence, Sheila R. Foster Jan 1997

Intent And Incoherence, Sheila R. Foster

Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, Professor Sheila Foster dissects the intent standard in equal protection jurisprudence, filtering it through the lens of democratic process theory. Most legal scholars and commentators writing in this area continuously restate, and critique, the "rule" of intent as a uniform standard in constitutional law. However, it is clear from the Supreme Court's jurisprudence (and that of the lower federal courts) that different levels of consciousness can satisfy the discriminatory intent standard, and hence violate the Equal Protection Clause. Exactly what explains these disparate, and seemingly incoherent, levels of intent is the subject of this Article. Professor Foster …