this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2023
106 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

7185 readers
536 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MapleEngineer@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I thought that the Supreme Court had ruled that most back to work legislation was unconstitutional under Section 2 of the Charter. Given how loudly Goes was criticized for trying to take away teachers Charter rights using the Notwithstanding Clause I can't imagine the Liberals trying it.

[–] ThatBikeGuy@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

i think the notwithstanding clause is a provincial thing, not a federal thing. Its a concession the feds had to make in order to change the constitution in the 80's

[–] MapleEngineer@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago

With the patriation of the Canadian Constitution in 1982, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms brought many changes to the constitutional structure of the country. One of these was the inclusion of a notwithstanding power in Section 33. This section, often referred to as the “notwithstanding clause,” allows federal, provincial and territorial parliaments and governments to temporarily override or supersede certain Charter rights.

Any one of them can use the Notwithstanding Clause to violate our constitutional rights.