Law Commons^™

Homelessness And The Charter Of Rights, Mel Cousins

Mel Cousins

There have, to date, been relatively few cases concerning homelessness and the Canadian Charter of Rights. Yet the rights set out in the Charter, such as the right to freedom of expression (s. 2(b), the right to life, liberty and the security of person (s. 7) and equality rights (s. 15) should all play an important role in protecting the position of a disadvantaged group such as the homeless. This article looks at some of the main cases concerning homelessness and the Charter (part I). It then goes on to look at the constitutional case law of the United States …

‘A Recommitment To The Idea Of Substantive Equality’ (Or Not)? S. 15(1) Of The Charter Of Rights After Kapp: Harris V Canada (Human Resources And Skills Development), Mel Cousins

Mel Cousins

This note looks at the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal in Harris – a case which raised important equality issues about the operation of the ‘drop out’ provisions in the Canadian Pension Plan. The case is interesting both for the issue itself but also because it is one of the first judgments to consider the impact of the Supreme Court’s restatement in Kapp of its approach to s. 15. However, the court of appeal was split with all three judges giving a different analysis of the issues (albeit that the claim was rejected on a split decision). Part …

What Do We Owe Future Generations?, Neil H. Buchanan

Neil H. Buchanan

In the United States, it is common for legal scholars, economists, politicians and others to claim that we are selfishly harming “our children and grandchildren” by (among many other things) running large government budget deficits. This article first asks two broad questions: (1) Do we owe future generations anything at all as a philosophical matter? and (2) If we do owe something to future generations, how should we balance their interests against our own? The short answers are “Probably” and “We really are not sure.”

Finding only general answers to these general questions, I then look specifically at U.S. fiscal …

Fitting Punishment, Juliet P. Stumpf

Juliet P Stumpf

Proportionality is conspicuously absent from the legal framework for immigration sanctions. Immigration law relies on one sanction – deportation – as the ubiquitous penalty for any immigration violation. Neither the gravity of the violation nor the harm that results bears on whether deportation is the consequence for an immigration violation. Immigration law stands alone in the legal landscape in this respect. Criminal punishment incorporates proportionality when imposing sentences that are graduated based on the gravity of the offense; contract and tort law provide for damages that are graduated based on the harm to others or to society. This Article represents …