An investigation into what happens when the Supreme Court of Canada declares a statute unconstitutional.
When the Supreme Court of Canada makes a decision that invalidates a statute, it creates a constitutional moment. But does that have a direct and observable impact on public policy? Constraining the Court explores what happens when a statute involving a significant public policy issue--French language rights in Quebec, supervised consumption sites, abortion, or medical assistance in dying--is declared unconstitutional. James B. Kelly examines the conditions under which Parliament or provincial/territorial legislatures attempt to contain the policy impact of judicial invalidation and engage in non-compliance without invoking the notwithstanding clause. He considers the importance of the issue, the unpopularity of a judicial decision, the limited reach of a negative rights instrument such as the Charter, the context of federalism, and the mixture of public and private action behind any legislative response. While the Supreme Court's importance cannot be denied, this rigorous analysis convincingly concludes that a judicial decision does not necessarily determine a policy outcome.Les informations fournies dans la section « Synopsis » peuvent faire référence à une autre édition de ce titre.
James B. Kelly is professor in the Department of Political Science at Concordia University. He is the author of Governing with the Charter: Legislative and Judicial Activism and Framers' Intent. He served as the 2006-07 Seagram Chair in Canadian Studies at the McGill Institute for the Study of Canada, where he coedited Contested Constitutionalism: Reflections on the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms with Christopher P. Manfredi. With Janet L. Hiebert, he is also a coauthor of Parliamentary Bills of Rights: The Experiences of New Zealand and the United Kingdom. He has been a visiting fellow at the Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies at Melbourne Law School; visiting professor at the Faculty of Law of Bar-IIan University, Israel; and editor of the Canadian Journal of Political Science.
Les informations fournies dans la section « A propos du livre » peuvent faire référence à une autre édition de ce titre.
Vendeur : PBShop.store UK, Fairford, GLOS, Royaume-Uni
PAP. Etat : New. New Book. Shipped from UK. Established seller since 2000. N° de réf. du vendeur FW-9780774870481
Quantité disponible : 15 disponible(s)
Vendeur : Rarewaves.com USA, London, LONDO, Royaume-Uni
Paperback. Etat : New. When the Supreme Court of Canada makes a decision that invalidates a statute, it creates a constitutional moment. But does that have a direct and observable impact on public policy? Constraining the Court explores what happens when a statute involving a significant public policy issue - French language rights in Quebec, supervised consumption sites, abortion, or medical assistance in dying - is declared unconstitutional. James B. Kelly examines the conditions under which Parliament or provincial/territorial legislatures attempt to contain the policy impact of judicial invalidation and engage in non-compliance without invoking the notwithstanding clause. He considers the importance of the issue, the unpopularity of a judicial decision, the limited reach of a negative rights instrument such as the Charter, the context of federalism, and the mixture of public and private action behind any legislative response. While the Supreme Court's importance cannot be denied, this rigorous analysis convincingly concludes that a judicial decision does not necessarily determine a policy outcome. N° de réf. du vendeur LU-9780774870481
Quantité disponible : 2 disponible(s)
Vendeur : Brook Bookstore On Demand, Napoli, NA, Italie
Etat : new. N° de réf. du vendeur FDDFLDM9JZ
Quantité disponible : Plus de 20 disponibles
Vendeur : Ria Christie Collections, Uxbridge, Royaume-Uni
Etat : New. In English. N° de réf. du vendeur ria9780774870481_new
Quantité disponible : Plus de 20 disponibles
Vendeur : Majestic Books, Hounslow, Royaume-Uni
Etat : New. N° de réf. du vendeur 410144522
Quantité disponible : 3 disponible(s)
Vendeur : Revaluation Books, Exeter, Royaume-Uni
Paperback. Etat : Brand New. 448 pages. 9.00x6.00x1.30 inches. In Stock. N° de réf. du vendeur __0774870486
Quantité disponible : 2 disponible(s)
Vendeur : THE SAINT BOOKSTORE, Southport, Royaume-Uni
Paperback / softback. Etat : New. New copy - Usually dispatched within 4 working days. N° de réf. du vendeur B9780774870481
Quantité disponible : Plus de 20 disponibles
Vendeur : Books Puddle, New York, NY, Etats-Unis
Etat : New. N° de réf. du vendeur 26403042517
Quantité disponible : 3 disponible(s)
Vendeur : Rarewaves.com UK, London, Royaume-Uni
Paperback. Etat : New. When the Supreme Court of Canada makes a decision that invalidates a statute, it creates a constitutional moment. But does that have a direct and observable impact on public policy? Constraining the Court explores what happens when a statute involving a significant public policy issue - French language rights in Quebec, supervised consumption sites, abortion, or medical assistance in dying - is declared unconstitutional. James B. Kelly examines the conditions under which Parliament or provincial/territorial legislatures attempt to contain the policy impact of judicial invalidation and engage in non-compliance without invoking the notwithstanding clause. He considers the importance of the issue, the unpopularity of a judicial decision, the limited reach of a negative rights instrument such as the Charter, the context of federalism, and the mixture of public and private action behind any legislative response. While the Supreme Court's importance cannot be denied, this rigorous analysis convincingly concludes that a judicial decision does not necessarily determine a policy outcome. N° de réf. du vendeur LU-9780774870481
Quantité disponible : 2 disponible(s)