Limiting rights, Canadian style : the Supreme Court of Canada, American jurisprudence and section 1 of the Charter /

The addition of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms represented a fundamental shift in Canadian governance. Many saw the tabling of such a document as a further, even fmal, step towards the Americanization of the Canadian polity. While the Charter's presence has significantly altered the relationship between citizens, government and the courts, it has done so by maintaining the traditional values and experiences that has been the hallmarks of Canadian constitutionalism. This is in contrast to the fears harboured by critics suggesting that the Charter was a further Americanization of the Canadian Polity, notwithstanding the very different natures of the American Bill of Rights and the Canadian Charter. Analyzing American Supreme Court precedent use by the Canadian Supreme Court has demonstrated that such an Americanization has not, in fact, occurred. In the present analysis of American precedent use in section 1 limitation of rights cases, the citation of these precedents are at best episodic, at least on the quantitative level. Qualitatively, the Canadian Supreme Court generally uses American jurisprudence to further support broad definitions of 'great rights' . As for the more intricate details of rights limitations and the process involved in detennining how Charter rights are limited, one would be hard pressed to find even cursory references to American case law.

The Supreme Court of Canada Ruling in Carter v. Canada: A New Era of End-of-Life Care for Canadians

La tribune de l'éditeur / Editor's Soapbox

Digest of cases determined in the Supreme court of Canada; comprising all the cases reported in volumes 34 to 54 of the official reports, Cameron's Supreme court cases, Coutlee's Supreme court cases, and Cameron's Supreme court practice.

Mode of access: Internet.

The Supreme court act R.S., c. 139 (1906) and rules : with references to all the decisions of the court dealing with its practice and jurisprudence /

Mode of access: Internet.

Driedger's 'Modern Principle' at the Supreme Court of Canada: Interpretation, Justification, Legitimization

Un résumé en français est également disponible

3.4 United States Supreme Court 1938

Gaines’ legal team, led by Houston, had faith in the justice system of the United States and anticipated getting a fair trial at the federal level. So far, all decisions had occurred in Missouri, a state with a segregated system.The fact that Gaines v Canada had reached the Supreme Court was promising indeed. It was rare that any case involving African-Americans would be considered by the highest court in the land. President Franklin D. Roosevelt had been appointing Justices that were more willing to consider cases concerned with civil rights. On November 9, 1938, the Supreme Court of the United States heard arguments in the Gaines v Canada case. The defense was unmoved by the rude treatment and made their presentation with professionalism and aplomb. Houston’s argument remained steadfast; not only was the state of Missouri’s statute concerning out-of-state tuition for blacks in violation of the 14th Amendment, but the very idea of segregation itself violated the Constitution. William Hogsett, the attorney for the University of Missouri, countered that the school was merely following state laws. The MU legal team was flustered as questions from the bench forced them to correct overstatements regarding Missouri’s “generosity to Negro students”. With crossed fingers and high hopes, the Gaines legal team rested their case and awaited the verdict. Meanwhile, Lloyd Gaines was still in Michigan. Lloyd held a W.P.A. job as a Civil Service Clerk and was in constant contact with his family and attorneys. His mood in his correspondence was hopeful and positive.

1.2 News Article About US Supreme Court Justices Rule in Favor of Lloyd Gaines by 6 to 2 Vote in The Call Newspaper

Following the decision, northern newspapers hailed it as “the Supreme Court speaking out in defense of the quality of human rights.” The Kansas City Call, one of the leading black newspapers in Missouri, declared, “If keeping the races separate is so important to Missourians that coeducation is unthinkable then let them count the cost!” The NAACP’s long-term plan for casting financial burden upon the Jim Crow states was now a reality.

The Saskatchewan law reports. Reports of cases decided in the Supreme court of Saskatchewan, in the Court of appeal, and in His Majesty's Court of King's bench.

Vols. 1-10 published at Toronto, by the Canada law book company, limited

Iowa Supreme Court, Marriage Case, docket No. 07-1449.

In a unanimous decision, the Iowa Supreme Court today held that the Iowa statute limiting civil marriage to a union between a man and a woman violates the equal protection clause of the Iowa Constitution. The decision strikes the language from Iowa Code section 595.2 limiting civil marriage to a man and a woman. It further directs that the remaining statutory language be interpreted and applied in a manner allowing gay and lesbian people full access to the institution of civil marriage.

Iowa Supreme Court Improvement Project for Child in Need of Assistance Cases: Annual Report and Proposed Policy Revisions.

The first part of a three year plan to evaluate and recommend improvements to Iowa's Juvenile Courts.

Iowa Supreme Court Improvement Project for Child in Need of Assistance Cases: A Study of Iowa's Court Performance in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases and Plan for Improvement.

A report of a one year assessment of Iowa's Juvenile Courts handling of Child in Need of Assistance cases and a plan for improvement.

Iowa Supreme Court Improvement Project for Child in Need of Assistance Cases: A Plan for Improvement of Iowa's Court Performance in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases.

A plan for improvement of Iowa's Juvenile Courts handling of Child in Need of Assistance cases. A brief report focusing on just the plan for improvement pulled from the main report: A Study of Iowa's Court Performance in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases and Plan for Improvement.