Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Reply To Professor Pothier's Review Of Power Without Law: The Supreme Court Of Canada, The Marshall Decisions And The Failure Of Judicial Activism, Alex M. Cameron
A Reply To Professor Pothier's Review Of Power Without Law: The Supreme Court Of Canada, The Marshall Decisions And The Failure Of Judicial Activism, Alex M. Cameron
Dalhousie Law Journal
The Spring 2010 edition of the Dalhousie Law Journal contains an article by Professor Dianne Pothier, discussing my book, Power Without Law: The Supreme Court of Canada, The Marshall Decisions and the Failure of JudicialActivism. In the review, Professor Pothier strongly disagrees with the book's critique of the Supreme Court of Canada's majority decision in R. v. Marshall. In particular, she disagrees with the argument that the alleged treaty right of aboriginals to hunt, fish, gather and trade for necessaries, described in Justice Binnie's majority decision, is constitutionally flawed. Professor Pothier also suggests that the argument is the central thesis …
Alex M. Cameron, Power Without Law. The Supreme Court Of Canada, .The Marshall Decisions, And The Failure Of Judicial Activism, Dianne Pothier
Alex M. Cameron, Power Without Law. The Supreme Court Of Canada, .The Marshall Decisions, And The Failure Of Judicial Activism, Dianne Pothier
Dalhousie Law Journal
Alex Cameron's book, Power WithoutLaw, is a scathing critique ofthe Supreme Court of Canada's 1999 decisions in R. v. Marshall upholding Donald Marshall Jr.'s Mi'kmaq treaty claim. Cameron's book has attracted a lot of attention because of the author's position as Crown counsel for the government of Nova Scotia. Cameron was not involved as a lawyer in the Marshallcase itself. As a fisheries prosecution, Marshallwas a matter of federal jurisdiction pursuant to s. 91(12) of the Constitution Act, 1867, and Nova Scotia chose not to intervene. However, Cameron did become involved in a subsequent case dealing with the same series …
Book Review Of Power Without Law: The Supreme Court Of Canada, The Marshall Decisions, And The Failure Of Judicial Activism By Alex M Cameron, Dianne Pothier
Book Review Of Power Without Law: The Supreme Court Of Canada, The Marshall Decisions, And The Failure Of Judicial Activism By Alex M Cameron, Dianne Pothier
Dianne Pothier Collection
Alex Cameron’s book, Power Without Law, is a scathing critique of the Supreme Court of Canada’s 1999 decisions in R. v. Marshall upholding Donald Marshall Jr.’s Mi’kmaq treaty claim. Cameron’s book has attracted a lot of attention because of the author’s position as Crown counsel for the government of Nova Scotia. Cameron was not involved as a lawyer in the Marshall case itself. As a fisheries prosecution, Marshall was a matter of federal jurisdiction pursuant to s. 91(12) of the Constitution Act, 1867, 3 and Nova Scotia chose not to intervene. However, Cameron did become involved in a subsequent …
Power Without Law: The Supreme Court Of Canada, The Marshall Decisions, And The Failure Of Judicial Activism, Diana Ginn
Power Without Law: The Supreme Court Of Canada, The Marshall Decisions, And The Failure Of Judicial Activism, Diana Ginn
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
In Power Without Law, author Alex Cameron strongly criticizes "incautious judicial activism" which allows the law to become "too malleable to personal judicial predilection."' Cameron makes his arguments primarily through an analysis of a 1999 decision of the Supreme Court of Canada, R v Marshall (No 1)," in which the majority of the Court held that Aboriginal peoples in the Maritimes have a treaty right to hunt, fish and gather, and to sell the products of these activities in order to provide themselves with a moderate livelihood. Cameron also comments on two subsequent and closely related decisions, R v Marshall …