Harper government's legal setbacks suggest strategy of confrontation

People may not like the government, but that doesn't give the courts the right to make laws.

Canadians are tired of the revolving door of the justice system, at least mandatory minimums was an attempt to deal with serious offenders.

Now it appears, our wonderful judiciary is trying to maintain status quo...

Seems his strategy is working.

The problem, as outlined in the article, is the Harper government is drafting laws that violate the Constitution and/or Charter of Rights and Freedoms even they know they will be struck down when put to a court challenge. Presumably this is to skew people such as yourself negatively toward the courts, when defending the Constitution and Charter is exactly what the Courts are supposed to do!

Parliament should not be drafting legislation they know is unconstitutional!

I suspect that was his strategy as well in appointing Duffy and Brazeau to the Senate. Gives him public support for abolishing the Senate. Too bad the Supreme court already said he doesn't have the authority to do that.

Maybe. Duffy was a cash cow for the Cons, brought in lots of donations. Brazeau was supposed to give cred with the Natives. I would be very surprised if these are the only ones scamming their expenses, they're just the ones that got caught.

The thing with the SOC is that Harper has appointed 5 of them, ie the majority, and even they won't go along with his agenda. Thank God.

And that's exactly what the founders had intended. Once appointed, they are independent of the Legislative branch and answerable only to the Court. Screw anybody's agenda!

Kind of hard to have the government, or nation in general, able to function if the courts strike down a generation later something that was completely legal just because the trends of modern times have changed. It's nothing new to Canadians of a conservative-to-moderate mindset that we've been living under a left-leaning judicial tyranny for a long time. Parliament was effectively neutered by the adoption of the Charter and there's no reason to believe that will ever change in our lifetimes.

Kind of hard to have the government, or nation in general, able to function if the courts strike down a generation later something that was completely legal just because the trends of modern times have changed. It's nothing new to Canadians of a conservative-to-moderate mindset that we've been living under a left-leaning judicial tyranny for a long time. Parliament was effectively neutered by the adoption of the Charter and there's no reason to believe that will ever change in our lifetimes.



Parliament isn't hobbled by the Judiciary. There are ways to change the Charter and the Constitution, but successive governments know they can't push their agendas past the Provinces to get those amendments passed.

And the whole point of law is that it adapts to the will of the people. If we see something is not morally right, they should come in to strike down things like Prostitution or Victim Surcharges. I like to think of myself as a centrist conservative, and I don't see this 'left leaning tyranny' you speak of.

I do see bills C-13 and C-14; "Cyberbullying" and designating people found not criminally responsible of a crime as dangerous offenders; as an extremist move to fix a problem that doesn't exist that can only result in less freedom for everyone. And that's the way it's probably designed.

I'm glad the courts are doing what they were designed to do, and protecting us from the legislators with an unlawful agenda.