November 2006
Monthly Archive
Canadian Constitutional Law #12: Paramountcy Doctrine Friday, Nov 24 2006
1L and Canadian Constitutional Law and Constitutional Law and Erin Morgan and McGill Faculty of Law 5:48 am
This is the last doctrine for a while! Paramountcy dictates that in areas of concurrent jurisdiction (remember the double aspect doctrine?), if there is a conflict between statutes the federal government will have final say. In this podcast will we observe a drunk driver have his licence both suspended and restricted (confusing, no?) and lament the fate of Saskatchewan farmers, who are often unappreciated by bureaucrats in Ottawa. Multiple Access v McCutchoen is also back by popular request.
Ross v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles (1975)
Multiple Access Ltd. v. McCutcheon (1982)
Bank of Montreal v. Hall (1990)
Canadian Constitutional Law #11: Interjurisdictional Immunity Doctrine Friday, Nov 24 2006
1L and Canadian Constitutional Law and Constitutional Law and Erin Morgan and McGill Faculty of Law 5:41 am
We continue our study of the many, many doctrines of Canadian Constitutional theory with the Interjurisdictional Immunity Doctrine, which exempts certain federal undertakings (think Bell Canada) from provincial laws which are otherwise valid. In this podcast you will learn:
- where labour laws go to die.
- what a hopeless anglo sounds like when she tries to read the titles of french cases.
- why my spell-check doesn’t recognize Interjurisdictional as a word.
Commission du Salaire Minimum v Bell Telephone Co. of Canada (1966) “Bell #1″
McKay v the Queen (1965)
Commission de la Sante et de la Securite du Travail v Bell Canada (1988) “Bell #2″
Orden Estate v. Grail (1998)
R. v Pacific Railway (1995)
Irwin Toy Ltd v Quebec (1989)
Canadian Constitutional Law #10: Ancillary Doctrine, Double Aspect Doctrine Friday, Nov 24 2006
1L and Canadian Constitutional Law and Constitutional Law and Erin Morgan and McGill Faculty of Law 5:34 am
In this podcast we celebrate the conclusion of my memo by studying two more doctrines! The Ancillary (also called Necessarily Incidental) doctrine is sometimes used to uphold a specific provision that infringes on another government’s jurisdiction when the provision is part of a larger valid scheme. The Double Aspect Doctrine is very commonly used to allow for concurrent jurisdictions of shared legislative power between the provinces and the federal government. The double aspects doctrine is simple but very important, and we will build on it in later podcasts.
General Motors of Canada Ltd. v City National Leasing (1989)
Multiple Access ltd. v McCutcheon (1982)
Constitutional Law II #31: Public Displays and Free Exercise Saturday, Nov 18 2006
1L and Constitutional Law and Constitutional Law II and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 6:16 pm
In this, our final episode for Constitutional Law II, we will examine public religious displays (such as nativity scenes and the Ten Commandments), as well as briefly consider the Free Exercise of religion.
Lynch v. Donnelly (SCOTUS, 1984)
Allegheny County v. Greater Pittsburgh ACLU (SCOTUS, 1989)
Stone v. Graham (SCOTUS, 1980)
McReary County v. ACLU of Kentucky (SCOTUS, 2005)
Van Orden v. Perry (SCOTUS, 2005)
Smith v. Employment Division (SCOTUS, 1990)
Constitutional Law II #30: More Tests and School Prayer Saturday, Nov 18 2006
1L and Constitutional Law and Constitutional Law II and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 6:10 pm
In this episode we will examine the coercion test, the history / tradition test, the “stupid legislator” test, as well as briefly examining school prayer and the pledge of allegiance.
Marsh v. Chambers (SCOTUS, 1983)
Lee v. Weisman (SCOTUS, 1992)
Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe (SCOTUS, 2000)
Wallace v. Jaffree (SCOTUS, 1985)
Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow (SCOTUS, 2004)
Constitutional Law II #29: Establishment and School Funding Saturday, Nov 18 2006
1L and Constitutional Law and Constitutional Law II and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 6:04 pm
Can the state provide funding to a private, religious school? The answer, as in many situations is, “it depends.” In this episode we’ll look at some of the various ways that private-school funding has been deemed an establishment, and other ways in which it was not.
Committee for Public Education v. Nyquist (SCOTUS, 1973)
Mueller v. Allen (SCOTUS, 1983)
Grand Rapids School District v. Ball (SCOTUS, 1985)
Auguilar v. Felton (SCOTUS, 1985)
Agostini v. Felton (SCOTUS, 1997)
Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (SCOTUS, 2002)
Constitutional Law II #28: Introduction to Establishment Saturday, Nov 18 2006
1L and Constitutional Law and Constitutional Law II and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 5:50 pm
We now turn to our final topic in Constitutional Law II, the Religion Clauses. The clauses protect the free exercise of religion, as well as ensuring against the establishment of a religion (aka “separation of church and state”). We will talk a bit about the historical context of the Religion Clauses, as well as two foundational cases.
Thomas Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists
Everson v. Board of Education (SCOTUS, 1947)
Lemon v. Kurtzman (SCOTUS, 1971)
Canadian Constitutional Law #9: Pith = Babies? Monday, Nov 13 2006
1L and Canadian Constitutional Law and Constitutional Law and Erin Morgan and McGill Faculty of Law 3:29 am
In this podcast we take a closer look at the Pith and Substance doctrine by examining one of the Morgentaler cases relating to abortion and the Reference re Employment Insurance regarding maternity leave benefits. Morgentaler is always interesting, this will be a fun podcast.
R v Morgentaler (1993)
Reference re Employment Insurance Act, (2005)
Unemployment Insurance Act 1940
Constitutional Law II #27: Defamation Monday, Nov 13 2006
1L and Constitutional Law and Constitutional Law II and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 3:08 am
Defamation is another type of “speech” that is often said as being outside the 1st Amendment. In this episode we briefly look at the substantive aspects of defamation, as well as the constitutional requirements of proof before a defamation cause of action can proceed against a public figure.
NY Times Co. v. Sullivan (SCOTUS, 1964)
Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (SCOTUS, 1974)
Constitutional Law II #26: Indecent Speech II Monday, Nov 13 2006
1L and Constitutional Law and Constitutional Law II and Neil Wehneman and University of Cincinnati College of Law 3:01 am
We continue our discussion of indecent speech by examining COPA, the Child Online Protection Act.
ACLU v. Ashcroft (SCOTUS, 2002)