Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Reforming The Regulation Of Political Advocacy By Charities: From Charity Under Siege To Charity Under Rescue?, Adam Parachin
Reforming The Regulation Of Political Advocacy By Charities: From Charity Under Siege To Charity Under Rescue?, Adam Parachin
Chicago-Kent Law Review
A newly elected liberal federal government in Canada has pledged to reform the legal distinction between charity and politics. This paper provides context to this reform initiative, linking it to a controversial political activities audit program funded by the former conservative federal government. It identifies three distorting ideas about charity—that charity can be understood as a tax expenditure, economic or neutral concept—that should be eschewed in the reform process. It also identifies three characteristics of charity—the capacity of charities for thought leadership, the pervasiveness of messaging in charitable programming and the distinctiveness of charity and government—that should guide reformers.
A Tale Of Two Countries' Engagement With The Fair Cross Section Right: Aboriginal Underrepresentation On Ontario Juries And The Boston Marathon Bomber's Jury Wheel Challenge, Marie Comiskey
Chicago-Kent Law Review
In both Canada and the United States, the constitutional right to a jury trial includes the right to select a jury from a representative cross-section of the jury-eligible population. This article compares and contrasts how this right has been interpreted in the two countries through the lens of recent controversies. In Part I, the article examines how the Supreme Court of Canada and the United States Supreme Court have defined the representative cross-section component of the right to a jury trial in the two respective countries. In Part II, the article focuses on the crisis of Aboriginal underrepresentation on coroner …
Juror Bias, Voir Dire, And The Judge-Jury Relationship, Nancy S. Marder
Juror Bias, Voir Dire, And The Judge-Jury Relationship, Nancy S. Marder
Chicago-Kent Law Review
In the United States, voir dire is viewed as essential to selecting an impartial jury. Judges, lawyers, and the public fervently believe that a fair trial depends on distinguishing between prospective jurors who are impartial and those who are not. However, in England, Australia, and Canada, there are impartial jury trials without voir dire. This article challenges the assumption that prospective jurors enter the courtroom as either impartial or partial and that voir dire will reveal the impartial ones. Though voir dire fails as an “impartiality detector,” this article explores how voir dire contributes to the trial process in two …