Abstract

ABSTRACT Recent interest in the use of section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has renewed political and scholarly attention to this unique device of constitutional politics. The notwithstanding clause is notable for being an opt-out clause exclusively available for government use, positioning it above the courts on key areas of rights. This article argues that the notwithstanding clause can be understood properly as an institutionalized mechanism of court curbing; that is, as an effort to limit a court’s power. We analyze uses of the notwithstanding clause using national and regional media coverage to understand how section 33 is framed, as well as an original dataset that investigates Canadians’ support of the notwithstanding clause and court curbing.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.