DOCSLIB.ORG

I by Erin Crandall Department of Political Science Mcgill University

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
I by Erin Crandall Department of Political Science Mcgill University UNDERSTANDING JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS REFORM: COMPARING AUSTRALIA, CANADA, AND THE UNITED STATES by Erin Crandall Department of Political Science McGill University, Montreal January 2013 A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. © Erin Crandall, 2013 i ABSTRACT The appointment of a judge, regardless of the process followed, is a political act. With the global expansion of judicial power, the topic of judicial appointments has become one of growing political importance. However, comparative research on judicial appointments reform has so far been limited. This dissertation proposes and tests a theory for understanding the timing and nature of reforms to judicial appointments systems, the Judicial Politics Trigger Theory, by looking at the final courts of appeal in Canada, Australia, and the United States. Examining these three courts from their respective origins to the present day, the dissertation situates contemporary interest in judicial appointments reform within the larger framework of each court‘s institutional history. Drawing upon in-depth interviews and archival research, it finds that changes to judicial appointments systems in these cases have tended to evolve incrementally over time. In addition, the dissertation highlights the importance that institutional rules can play in structuring the opportunities for and outcomes of reform, and confirms that there is a correlation between the perception of increased judicial empowerment and calls for judicial appointments reform. Consequently, as the judicial branches in various countries continue to gain political power, interest in and attempts to reform the judicial appointments processes of these courts are likely to continue, making research of such reform all the more essential. RÉSUMÉ La nomination d'un juge, quelle que soit la procédure suivie, est un acte politique. Avec l'expansion mondiale du pouvoir judiciaire, le sujet de la sélection des juges est devenu d'une importance politique plus forte. Cependant, la recherche comparative sur la réforme des processus de nominations judiciaires a été limitée jusqu'a present. Cette thèse propose et teste une théorie pour comprendre le calendrier et la nature des réformes des systèmes de sélection des juges, la théorie du «Judicial Politics Trigger», en examinant les tribunaux de dernière instance au Canada, en Australie et aux États-Unis. En faisant l'examen de ces trois tribunaux de leurs origines respectives à aujourd'hui, la thèse situe l'intérêt contemporain pour la réforme des systemes de sélection des juges dans le cadre plus large de l'histoire institutionnelle de chaque tribunal. S'appuyant sur des entretiens avec les élites politiques et des recherches dans les archives, la thèse etablit que les changements de processus de nominations judiciaires dans ces cas ont eu tendance à évoluer progressivement au fil du temps. En outre, la thèse met en évidence l'importance que les règles institutionnelles peuvent jouer dans la structuration des possibilités et des résultats de la réforme, et confirme qu'il existe une corrélation entre la perception de l'augmentation du pouvoir judiciaire et les appels à la réforme des systemes de selection des juges. Par conséquent, parce les branches judiciaires continuent de conquérir le pouvoir politique, l'intérêt et les tentatives de réformer les processus de sélection des juges de ces tribunaux sont susceptibles de se poursuivre, ce qui rend la recherche de telles réformes d'autant plus indispensable. i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The financial costs to undertake a research project are often quite considerable. I am grateful to have received financial support for this research through a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Doctoral Fellowship, an Endeavour Research Fellowship from the Government of Australia, and an Arts Graduate Student Travel Award from McGill University. Besides being able to afford a hat, I was lucky to always have a place to hang it. In Canada, logistical support was provided by both the Institute for the Study of Canada and the Research Group on Constitutional Studies at McGill University. While in Australia, a home base was provided by the Research School of Social Sciences at the Australian National University. I would like to especially thank Bob Goodin for being such a welcoming and supportive advisor during my time there. I benefitted greatly from the guidance of my supervisory committee. Maria Popova provided insightful comments that pushed me to clarify many components of this project. Jacob Levy offered advice and support well beyond the call of duty, including welcoming me into the activities of McGill‘s political theory community. Christopher Manfredi was, by any count, more than a student could hope for in a supervisor. He worked to simplify the complicated and opened doors that might have otherwise remained closed. My time at McGill brought me many things – good friends and wonderful memories being chief among them. By far the best of these was finding Jeff who has been my biggest source of support. While there are many things to thank him for, it must be acknowledged that he ably performed the unenviable task of unofficial proofreader. With his aid, no one should ever discover that I actually operate at a sixth-grade reading level. I will always be thankful for the continued support of my family. I have two lovely brothers who disagree on everything expect a mutual suspicion that I‘ve continued my studies to make them look bad. My parents have let us follow our own paths and have been there to cheer us on along the way. It‘s hard to measure how much I‘ve gained from them. I would like to dedicate this work to my Aunt Brenda, who was the favourite teacher to countless students and who is missed every single day. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... I ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................... II FIGURES ....................................................................................................................................... V INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 1 APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS REFORM ......................................... 3 JUDICIAL POLITICS TRIGGER THEORY ...................................................................................... 10 Formal Reform...................................................................................................................... 10 Informal Reform ................................................................................................................... 15 DEFINING THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT ..................................................................................... 17 Case Selection ....................................................................................................................... 17 Time Periods Chosen ............................................................................................................ 19 Methodological Approach .................................................................................................... 20 Methods for Collecting Data ................................................................................................ 21 THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS AND THE ARGUMENT IN BRIEF .................................................. 22 ROADMAP .................................................................................................................................. 24 THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (1875-1992) ............................................................. 27 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 28 FOUNDATIONS: CONFEDERATION AND THE FOUNDING OF THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (1864-1875) ............................................................................................................................... 29 Establishing the Supreme Court of Canada .......................................................................... 32 PERIOD 1: THE SUPREME COURT AS SECOND FIDDLE (1875-1949) ......................................... 34 The Supreme Court‘s Early Struggles .................................................................................. 35 The Supreme Court Act, 1949 .............................................................................................. 41 PERIOD 2: THE SUPREME COURT, FEDERALISM, AND THE POLITICS OF REFORM (1949-1992) 44 iii The Fulton-Favreau Formula (1966) .................................................................................... 47 The Victoria Charter (1968-1971) ........................................................................................ 49 Constitutional Patriation (1978-1982) .................................................................................. 52 Appointment Controversy and Informal Reform (1949-1980) ............................................. 58 The Changing Role of the Supreme Court ............................................................................ 63 Appointment Controversy and Informal Reform (1980-1988) ............................................ 64 The Meech Lake Accord (1987-1990) .................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Journaux Journals
    HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA CHAMBRE DES COMMUNES DU CANADA 37th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION 37e LÉGISLATURE, 1re SESSION Journals Journaux No. 12 No 12 Tuesday, February 13, 2001 Le mardi 13 février 2001 10:00 a.m. 10 heures The Clerk informed the House of the unavoidable absence of the Le Greffier informe la Chambre de l’absence inévitable du Speaker. Président. Whereupon, Mr. Kilger (Stormont — Dundas — Charlotten- Sur ce, M. Kilger (Stormont — Dundas — Charlottenburgh), burgh), Deputy Speaker and Chairman of Committees of the Vice–président et président des Comités pléniers, assume la Whole, took the Chair, pursuant to subsection 43(1) of the présidence, conformément au paragraphe 43(1) de la Loi sur le Parliament of Canada Act. Parlement du Canada. PRAYERS PRIÈRE DAILY ROUTINE OF BUSINESS AFFAIRES COURANTES ORDINAIRES PRESENTING REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES PRÉSENTATION DE RAPPORTS DE COMITÉS Mr. Lee (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the M. Lee (secrétaire parlementaire du leader du gouvernement à la Government in the House of Commons), from the Standing Chambre des communes), du Comité permanent de la procédure et Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, presented the des affaires de la Chambre, présente le 1er rapport de ce Comité, 1st Report of the Committee, which was as follows: dont voici le texte : The Committee recommends, pursuant to Standing Orders 104 Votre Comité recommande, conformément au mandat que lui and 114, that the list of members and associate members for confèrent les articles 104 et 114 du Règlement, que la liste
    [Show full text]
  • Justice and Efficiency in Mega-Litigation
    Justice and Efficiency in Mega-Litigation Anna Olijnyk Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Adelaide Law School The University of Adelaide October 2014 ii CONTENTS Abstract ....................................................................................................................................... ix Declaration .................................................................................................................................. x Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................... xi Note on Referencing Conventions ......................................................................................... xii Part I: The Problem .................................................................................................................... 2 Chapter 1: Introduction ......................................................................................................... 3 I Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 3 II Significance and Limits of the Study ........................................................................... 6 III Methodology and Structure ......................................................................................... 8 Chapter 2: Justice and Efficiency as Aims of Civil Procedure ....................................... 12 I Introduction ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Symposium:Jurocracy and Distrust:Reconsidering The
    User Name: Tyler Cooper Date and Time: Monday, May 20, 2019 6:05:00 PM EDT Job Number: 89258756 Document (1) 1. SYMPOSIUM:JUROCRACY AND DISTRUST:RECONSIDERING THE FEDERAL JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS PROCESS:JUDICIAL SELECTION AND DEMOCRATIC THEORY: DEMAND, SUPPLY, AND LIFE TENURE, 26 Cardozo L. Rev. 579 Client/Matter: -None- | About LexisNexis | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Copyright © 2019 LexisNexis Tyler Cooper SYMPOSIUM:JUROCRACY AND DISTRUST:RECONSIDERING THE FEDERAL JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS PROCESS:JUDICIAL SELECTION AND DEMOCRATIC THEORY: DEMAND, SUPPLY, AND LIFE TENURE January, 2005 Reporter 26 Cardozo L. Rev. 579 * Length: 27441 words Author: Judith Resnik* * Arthur Liman Professor of Law, Yale Law School. © Judith Resnik 2005. This article stems from presentations at the Symposium, Jurocracy, at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in March of 2004 and at the Symposium, Judicial Appointments in a Free and Democratic Society, at the University of Toronto Law School in April of 2004, and builds on my articles "Uncle Sam Modernizes his Justice System": Inventing the District Courts of the Twentieth Century, 90 Geo. L.J. 607 (2002), Trial as Error, Jurisdiction as Injury: Transforming the Meaning of Article III, 113 Harv. L. Rev. 924 (2000), and Changing Criteria for Judging Judges, 84 Nw. U. L. Rev. 889 (1990), as well as on testimony that I submitted to subcommittees of the United States Senate and of the Canadian House of Commons on the topic of judicial nominations. I benefited from comments of other participants, the exchanges at these symposia and hearings, and from discussions with Seyla Benhabib and Deborah Hensler. My thanks to Joseph Blocher, Andrew Goldstein, Paige Herwig, Johanna Kalb, Alison Mackenzie, Jennifer Peresie, Bertrall Ross, Kirby Smith, Laura Smolowe, and Steven Wu for research assistance, to Gene Coakley for all his efforts to locate relevant materials, and to Denny Curtis, Vicki Jackson, Roy Mersky, Roberta Romano, and Albert Yoon for helpful comments on earlier drafts.
    [Show full text]
  • Allocution De La Juge Suzanne Côté : Réception De Bienvenue
    Allocution de la juge Suzanne Côté : Réception de bienvenue The judges of The Supreme Court of Les juges de La Cour suprême du Canada and the University of Ottawa’s Canada et la Faculté de droit de l’Uni- Faculty of Law have always maintained versité d’Ottawa ont toujours entretenu close personal and professional ties. It is d’étroites relations, tant personnelles tradition to hold a welcoming reception que professionnelles. La tradition veut for each newly appointed judge to the que l’on tienne une réception d’accueil Supreme Court of Canada. The Chief Jus- pour chaque juge nouvellement nommé tice and Puisne Judges of the Supreme à la Cour suprême du Canada. La juge Court of Canada, Deans of the Common en chef et les juges puînés de la Cour Law and Civil Law Sections, professors suprême du Canada, les doyennes des and students are invited to attend. In sections respectives de common law keeping with this tradition, the Faculty et de droit civil, le corps professoral et of Law celebrated on March 19th, 2015 the la population étudiante sont conviés à appointment of the Honourable Justice cette réception. Pour perpétuer cette Suzanne Côté. Here are her full remarks tradition, la Faculté de droit a célébré, le at this event. 19 mars 2015, la nomination de l’hono- rable juge Suzanne Côté. Voici la version intégrale de ses remarques lors de cet évènement. 283 Allocution de la juge Suzanne Côté : Réception de bienvenue Madame la Juge en chef, Chers collègues de la Cour suprême, Chers collègues des autres cours et tribunaux, Mesdames les Doyennes des sections de common law et de droit civil, Chers anciens confrères et consœurs du Barreau, Mesdames et Messieurs, C’est aveC beauCoup de plaisir que j’ai reçu l’invitation de Mesdames les Doyennes Des Rosiers1 et Lévesque2 d’assister à cette réception laquelle, me dit-on, s’inscrit dans une tradition maintenant bien ancrée de souhaiter 1 La doyenne Nathalie Des Rosiers a reçu sa licence en droit de l’Université de Montréal et a obtenu sa maitrise en droit de la Harvard Law School.
    [Show full text]
  • E Muslim Brotherhood and Egypt-Israel Peace Liad Porat
    102 e Muslim Brotherhood and Egypt-Israel Peace Liad Porat [email protected] www.besacenter.org THE BEGIN-SADAT CENTER FOR STRATEGIC STUDIES BAR-ILAN UNIVERSITY Mideast Security and Policy Studies No. 102 The Muslim Brotherhood and Egypt-Israel Peace Liad Porat © The Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan 5290002 Israel http://www.besacenter.org ISSN 0793-1042 January 2014 The Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies The Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies advances a realist, conservative, and Zionist agenda in the search for security and peace for Israel. It was named in memory of Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat, whose efforts in pursuing peace lay the cornerstone for conflict resolution in the Middle East. The center conducts policy-relevant research on strategic subjects, particularly as they relate to the national security and foreign policy of Israel and Middle East regional affairs. Mideast Security and Policy Studies serve as a forum for publication or re-publication of research conducted by BESA associates. Publication of a work by BESA signifies that it is deemed worthy of public consideration but does not imply endorsement of the author’s views or conclusions. Colloquia on Strategy and Diplomacy summarize the papers delivered at conferences and seminars held by the Center for the academic, military, official and general publics. In sponsoring these discussions, the BESA Center aims to stimulate public debate on, and consideration of, contending approaches to problems of peace and war in the Middle East. The Policy Memorandum series consists of policy-oriented papers.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 International Day of Commemoration in Memory of the Victims of the Holocaust
    Glasses of those murdered at Auschwitz Birkenau Nazi German concentration and death camp (1941-1945). © Paweł Sawicki, Auschwitz Memorial 2021 INTERNATIONAL DAY OF COMMEMORATION IN MEMORY OF THE VICTIMS OF THE HOLOCAUST Programme WEDNESDAY, 27 JANUARY 2021 11:00 A.M.–1:00 P.M. EST 17:00–19:00 CET COMMEMORATION CEREMONY Ms. Melissa FLEMING Under-Secretary-General for Global Communications MASTER OF CEREMONIES Mr. António GUTERRES United Nations Secretary-General H.E. Mr. Volkan BOZKIR President of the 75th session of the United Nations General Assembly Ms. Audrey AZOULAY Director-General of UNESCO Ms. Sarah NEMTANU and Ms. Deborah NEMTANU Violinists | “Sorrow” by Béla Bartók (1945-1981), performed from the crypt of the Mémorial de la Shoah, Paris. H.E. Ms. Angela MERKEL Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany KEYNOTE SPEAKER Hon. Irwin COTLER Special Envoy on Preserving Holocaust Remembrance and Combatting Antisemitism, Canada H.E. Mr. Gilad MENASHE ERDAN Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations H.E. Mr. Richard M. MILLS, Jr. Acting Representative of the United States to the United Nations Recitation of Memorial Prayers Cantor JULIA CADRAIN, Central Synagogue in New York El Male Rachamim and Kaddish Dr. Irene BUTTER and Ms. Shireen NASSAR Holocaust Survivor and Granddaughter in conversation with Ms. Clarissa WARD CNN’s Chief International Correspondent 2 Respondents to the question, “Why do you feel that learning about the Holocaust is important, and why should future generations know about it?” Mr. Piotr CYWINSKI, Poland Mr. Mark MASEKO, Zambia Professor Debórah DWORK, United States Professor Salah AL JABERY, Iraq Professor Yehuda BAUER, Israel Ms.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Series on the Federal Dimensions of Reforming the Supreme Court of Canada
    SPECIAL SERIES ON THE FEDERAL DIMENSIONS OF REFORMING THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA The Supreme Court of Canada: A Chronology of Change Jonathan Aiello Institute of Intergovernmental Relations School of Policy Studies, Queen’s University SC Working Paper 2011 21 May 1869 Intent on there being a final court of appeal in Canada following the Bill for creation of a Supreme country’s inception in 1867, John A. Macdonald, along with Court is withdrawn statesmen Télesphore Fournier, Alexander Mackenzie and Edward Blake propose a bill to establish the Supreme Court of Canada. However, the bill is withdrawn due to staunch support for the existing system under which disappointed litigants could appeal the decisions of Canadian courts to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) sitting in London. 18 March 1870 A second attempt at establishing a final court of appeal is again Second bill for creation of a thwarted by traditionalists and Conservative members of Parliament Supreme Court is withdrawn from Quebec, although this time the bill passed first reading in the House. 8 April 1875 The third attempt is successful, thanks largely to the efforts of the Third bill for creation of a same leaders - John A. Macdonald, Télesphore Fournier, Alexander Supreme Court passes Mackenzie and Edward Blake. Governor General Sir O’Grady Haly gives the Supreme Court Act royal assent on September 17th. 30 September 1875 The Honourable William Johnstone Ritchie, Samuel Henry Strong, The first five puisne justices Jean-Thomas Taschereau, Télesphore Fournier, and William are appointed to the Court Alexander Henry are appointed puisne judges to the Supreme Court of Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative North Americas: What Canada and The
    ALTERNATIVE NORTH AMERICAS What Canada and the United States Can Learn from Each Other David T. Jones ALTERNATIVE NORTH AMERICAS Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars One Woodrow Wilson Plaza 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20004 Copyright © 2014 by David T. Jones All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, scanned, or distributed in any printed or electronic form without permission. Please do not participate in or encourage piracy of copyrighted materials in violation of author’s rights. Published online. ISBN: 978-1-938027-36-9 DEDICATION Once more for Teresa The be and end of it all A Journey of Ten Thousand Years Begins with a Single Day (Forever Tandem) TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .................................................................................................................1 Chapter 1 Borders—Open Borders and Closing Threats .......................................... 12 Chapter 2 Unsettled Boundaries—That Not Yet Settled Border ................................ 24 Chapter 3 Arctic Sovereignty—Arctic Antics ............................................................. 45 Chapter 4 Immigrants and Refugees .........................................................................54 Chapter 5 Crime and (Lack of) Punishment .............................................................. 78 Chapter 6 Human Rights and Wrongs .................................................................... 102 Chapter 7 Language and Discord ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Dr. Irwin Cotler, MP
    Dr. Irwin Cotler, MP Irwin Cotler, PC, OC, MP, Ph.D. (born May 8, 1940) was Canada's Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada from 2003 until the Liberal government of Paul Martin lost power following the 2006 federal election. He was first elected to the Canadian House of Commons for the constituency of Mount Royal in a by-election in November 1999, winning over 91% of votes cast. He was sworn into Cabinet on December 12, 2003. The son of a lawyer, he was born in Montreal, Quebec, studied at McGill University there (receiving a BA in 1961 and a law degree three years later) and then continued his education at Yale University. For a short period, he worked with federal Minister of Justice John Turner. Cotler was a professor of law at McGill University and the director of its Human Rights Program from 1973 until his election as a Member of Parliament in 1999 for the Liberal Party of Canada. He has also been a visiting professor at Harvard Law School, a Woodrow Wilson Fellow at Yale Law School and is the recipient of five honorary doctorates. He was appointed in 1992 as an Officer of the Order of Canada. He is a past president of the Canadian Jewish Congress. Human Rights Cotler has served on the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and its sub-Committee on Human Rights and International Development, as well as on the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. In 2000, he was appointed special advisor to the Minister of Foreign Affairs on the International Criminal Court.
    [Show full text]
  • Download PDF (617.6
    INTRODUCTION Interpreting Québec’s Exile Within the Federation Selected Political Essays I often repeat, half-seriously, that I am a historian of ideas and a teacher of political philosophy, hidden in a political science department. At all Québec universities, as in the rest of North America, much of the business of political science has to do with positivistic approaches, quan- titative methods, and rational choice theories for explaining social behav- iour. Within the discipline, I belong to the minority methodological and epistemological position. To make sense of politics, I believe one has to rely on an interdisciplinary approach. The insights of philosophy, history, literature, sociology, and law can all enrich the search for coherent and meaningful interpretations of political events, phenomena, and doctrines. Such a combination forms the spirit or, as the Germans say, Geist of a humanistic approach to the study of politics. This book is one example of doing political science in such a way, applied to the task of interpreting the situation of Québec and of Québecers within the Canadian federation. The book belongs squarely to the discipline of political science with chapters studying the theory and practice of Canadian federalism, as well as analysing various aspects of nationalism in Québec. It borrows heavily from the domain of constitutional law in chapters dealing with Canada’s fundamental laws of 1867 and 1982. Intellectual history has always fas- cinated me, and I hope that readers who share my interest will appreci- ate the chapters that deal with the figures such as Lord Durham, Gérard Bouchard, Charles Taylor, James Tully, and Michel Seymour.
    [Show full text]
  • High Court of Australia
    HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA ANNUAL REPORT 2000-01 High Court of Australia Canberra ACT 7 December 2001 Dear Attorney, In accordance with Section 47 of the High Court of Australia Act 1979, I submit on behalf of the Court and with its approval a report relating to the administration of the affairs of the High Court of Australia under Section 17 of the Act for the year ended 30 June 2001, together with financial statements in respect of the year in the form approved by the Minister for Finance. Sub-section 47(3) of the Act requires you to cause a copy of this report to be laid before each House of Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after its receipt by you. Yours sincerely, (C.M. DOOGAN) Chief Executive and Principal Registrar of the High Court of Australia The Honourable D. Williams, AM, QC, MP Attorney-General Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 CONTENTS Page PART I - PREAMBLE Aids to Access 4 PART II - INTRODUCTION Chief Justice Gleeson 5 Justice Gaudron 5 Justice McHugh 6 Justice Gummow 6 Justice Kirby 6 Justice Hayne 7 Justice Callinan 7 PART III - THE YEAR IN REVIEW Changes in Proceedings 8 Self Represented Litigants 8 The Court and the Public 8 Developments in Information Technology 8 Links and Visits 8 PART IV - BACKGROUND INFORMATION Establishment 9 Functions and Powers 9 Sittings of the Court 9 Seat of the Court 11 Appointment of Justices of the High Court 12 Composition of the Court 12 Former Chief Justices and Justices of the Court 13 PART V - ADMINISTRATION General 14 External Scrutiny 14 Ecologically Sustainable Development
    [Show full text]
  • Reforming the Supreme Court Appointment Process, 2004-2014: a 10-Year Democratic Audit 2014 Canliidocs 33319 Adam M
    The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference Volume 67 (2014) Article 4 Reforming the Supreme Court Appointment Process, 2004-2014: A 10-Year Democratic Audit 2014 CanLIIDocs 33319 Adam M. Dodek Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/sclr This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. Citation Information Dodek, Adam M.. "Reforming the Supreme Court Appointment Process, 2004-2014: A 10-Year Democratic Audit." The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference 67. (2014). http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/sclr/vol67/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Osgoode Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in The uS preme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference by an authorized editor of Osgoode Digital Commons. Reforming the Supreme Court Appointment Process, 2004-2014: A 10-Year Democratic Audit* Adam M. Dodek** 2014 CanLIIDocs 33319 The way in which Justice Rothstein was appointed marks an historic change in how we appoint judges in this country. It brought unprecedented openness and accountability to the process. The hearings allowed Canadians to get to know Justice Rothstein through their members of Parliament in a way that was not previously possible.1 — The Rt. Hon. Stephen Harper, PC [J]udicial appointments … [are] a critical part of the administration of justice in Canada … This is a legacy issue, and it will live on long after those who have the temporary stewardship of this position are no longer there.
    [Show full text]