Runnymede Radio: Recent Episodes
Runnymede Radio
Throughout the conversation, May considers what these changes may mean for liberal democracy, free expression, and the future of public debate, arguing that informal social pressures are increasingly being supplemented by institutional and legal mechanisms.
s judicial discipline system seeks to maintain both the integrity of the judiciary and the constitutional principles on which it rests.
s constitutional experience.Interested in learning more? Read Rogue Justice: The Rise of Judicial Supremacy in Israel. It is available in hardcover, paperback, and Kindle editions.
Eleanore Sunchild, KC (Sunchild Law) and Professor Tom Flanagan (University of Calgary) join us to discuss residential school denialism and recent proposals to prohibit it under the Criminal Code.The conversation explores the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, competing claims about residential school history, and the evidence underlying contemporary debates over residential school denialism.Sunchild and Flanagan discuss questions surrounding abuse and mortality within residential schools, the removal of Indigenous children from their families, and ongoing debates regarding unmarked graves and alleged burial sites. The guests also examine proposed amendments to the Criminal Code, the relationship between free expression and reconciliation, and the legal and moral arguments for and against criminalizing certain forms of denial, downplaying, or misrepresentation.Along the way, the discussion considers the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement, historical memory, and the role of criminal law in addressing disputed historical claims.
This episode of Runnymede Radio is the second half of a two-part series on the Borderland Pride v. Township of Emo case before the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal.In 2024, the Tribunal ordered Emo Township and Mayor Harold McQuaker to pay damages after the Township refused requests to proclaim Pride Month and display a Pride flag.Part II features an original interview with Josh Dehaas, Interim Litigation Director at the Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) and counsel for the CCF in its intervention in the Emo Township case.Dehaas critically examines the Tribunal’s reasoning and discusses the freedom of expression, compelled speech, and democratic decision-making concerns raised by the case.The conversation explores the relationship between freedom of expression and anti-discrimination law, including the role of “Charter values” in administrative decision-making, the implications of the Ward and Whatcott decisions, and broader constitutional questions surrounding compelled expression, human dignity, and municipal democracy.The discussion also examines the judicial review proceedings now underway, and the legal framework courts may apply in evaluating the Tribunal’s reasoning.
This episode of Runnymede Radio is the first half of a two-part series on the Borderland Pride v. Township of Emo case before the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal.Part I features an original interview with Doug Judson, lawyer and applicant in the proceedings against Emo Township and Mayor Harold McQuaker, following the Tribunal’s 2024 decision ordering damages after the Township refused requests to proclaim Pride Month and display a Pride flag.Judson discusses the background to the dispute, the Tribunal’s finding that Emo Township and its mayor discriminated against Borderland Pride, and the broader legal issues raised by the case.The conversation explores the legal test for discrimination under Ontario’s Human Rights Code, the Tribunal’s finding of bad faith against Mayor McQuaker, and broader constitutional and democratic questions concerning municipal governance, freedom of expression, and symbolic political decision-making.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, we feature an original interview with Professor Philippe Lagassé (Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University).Lagassé discusses his recent writing on the possible existence of a Crown prerogative to “keep the peace” within Canada, and what this would mean for the constitutional foundations of executive power. Using the Emergencies Act and the 2022 Public Order Emergency as context, he considers whether statutory frameworks fully define the scope of emergency authority.The conversation explores the relationship between prerogative and statute, including whether unwritten executive powers may offer a deeper—yet often narrower—basis for executive action than legislation in moments of crisis.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, we share a live recording from a bilingual event hosted by the Runnymede Society’s McGill University Chapter, featuring Professor Maxime St-Hilaire (Université de Sherbrooke) and Professor Victor Muñiz-Fraticelli (McGill University).The panel examines the enduring debate between legal positivism and natural law theory, focusing on whether law can be understood as a system grounded in social facts or whether its legitimacy depends on a connection to moral reasoning and the common good. Drawing on both classical traditions and contemporary scholarship, the speakers explore different approaches within positivism, the resurgence of natural law thought, and the implications of these theories for legal pluralism, the rule of law, and the professional identity of jurists.Recorded live at McGill University, this episode offers a careful examination of the theoretical foundations of legal order and their ongoing significance for public law in Canada. Portions of the discussion take place in both English and French.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, we feature a recording from a Western University Chapter panel with Professor Dwight Newman (University of Saskatchewan) and Professor Michael Coyle (Western University).Following a previous episode examining the drafting and interpretation of Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, this conversation explores how contemporary jurisprudence is shaping the scope and application of Aboriginal and treaty rights.The panel, titled “Will Reconciliation Require the Transfer of Private Land? A Discussion of Recent Jurisprudence and Reconciliation Efforts,” examines the implications of the Cowichan Tribes decision for Aboriginal title, including its potential impact on private land ownership, the security of property rights, and the broader framework of reconciliation in Canadian law.This episode offers a timely discussion of how constitutional principles are being interpreted in practice and what recent developments may signal for the future of Indigenous rights and Canadian constitutional law.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, we feature an original interview with Michael Scott (PrimaryDocuments.ca).Scott discusses his ongoing research on the drafting history of Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982—which recognizes and affirms existing Aboriginal and treaty rights—drawing on archival materials and his work with PrimaryDocuments.ca, a database of historical documents relating to the creation of Canada’s Constitution.The conversation explores the historical context of Section 35, the interpretive challenges posed by its ambiguity, and what the drafting record reveals (and does not reveal) about its meaning.This episode offers a careful examination of constitutional history and the role of historical sources in understanding foundational legal texts.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, we feature an original interview with Professor Norman Siebrasse (University of New Brunswick).Professor Siebrasse discusses his recent study using artificial intelligence to examine long-term trends in Supreme Court of Canada decisions. By analyzing thousands of judgments from 1974 to 2025, the study places cases on a rules–standards spectrum and identifies a marked shift toward more standard-like reasoning beginning in the early Charter era. The conversation also explores the idea of “Charter contagion,” the relationship between increasingly lengthy decisions and declining rule-likeness, and the broader promise and limits of AI in legal and academic research.This episode offers a careful examination of artificial intelligence as a research tool and of the evolving character of Supreme Court reasoning in Canada.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, we share a live recording from a student chapter event hosted by the Runnymede Society’s University of Calgary Chapter, featuring Professor Geoff Sigalet (UBCO).Professor Sigalet’s lecture makes the political and legal case against substantive judicial review of laws enacted under section 33 of the Charter. Drawing on recent constitutional litigation, academic debate, and institutional and political analysis, he explains why provinces have been more willing to invoke the notwithstanding clause since 2018, critiques arguments advanced by the Attorney General of Canada in favour of judicial scrutiny, and points out why such review would be wrong and unwise even if it were possible.Recorded live at the University of Calgary, this episode offers a careful examination of judicial power, legislative authority, and the political and legal role of the notwithstanding clause in Canada.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, we share a live recording from a student chapter event hosted by the Runnymede Society’s Osgoode Hall Chapter, featuring Malcolm Rowe of the Supreme Court of Canada.Justice Rowe’s lecture, titled “Can the Centre Hold?”, draws on W.B. Yeats’ The Second Coming to reflect on the pressures of an increasingly polarized society and the importance of moderation in public life. Blending political and legal philosophy, the lecture explores how these traditions intersect to shape a balanced constitutional order, and what it takes to maintain that balance in unsettled times.Recorded live at Osgoode Hall, this episode offers a thoughtful and measured reflection on polarization, moderation, and the ideas that hold a constitutional democracy together.
In this special retrospective episode of Runnymede Radio, former Runnymede Society National Directors Mark Mancini and Kris Kinsinger reflect on a consequential period in the organization’s history, recorded as part of Runnymede’s tenth anniversary.The conversation explores the resistance Runnymede faced as it grew beyond its early days, the disruption and challenges of the COVID years, and how the organization adapted under pressure while remaining grounded in its core commitments. Mark and Kris discuss what it meant to stand firm while staying flexible, and how Runnymede earned and defended its place in Canada’s academic and legal conversations.A candid reflection on Runnymede’s resilience, adaptation, and ongoing work.
In this special retrospective episode of Runnymede Radio, co-founders Joanna Baron and Asher Honickman reflect on the Runnymede Society’s earliest days, marking its tenth anniversary.The conversation revisits what first inspired Runnymede’s founding in 2016, the challenges of building a national forum for constitutional debate, and the ideas and principles that have endured over the past decade. Joanna and Asher also reflect on how the organization’s early ambitions shaped its growth—and what those formative years can tell us about Runnymede’s mission today.A candid look back at the origins of the Runnymede Society, with a few memorable anecdotes along the way.
influence des prises de position théoriques dites « woke » dans le milieu universitaire canadien? Le Professeur Stéphane Sérafin discute de deux incidences particulières pour expliquer pourquoi ces prises de position sont ancrées dans les universités canadiennes, et particulièrement dans les facultés de droit.
Quelle est l'influence des prises de position théoriques dites « woke » dans le milieu universitaire canadien? Le Professeur Stéphane Sérafin discute de deux incidences particulières pour expliquer pourquoi ces prises de position sont ancrées dans les universités canadiennes, et particulièrement dans les facultés de droit.
What is the proper pace of development of the common law? Today's encore episode from Law & Freedom 2025 features Christoph Pike (McCarthy Tétrault), Prof. Stéphane Sérafin (University of Ottawa Faculty of Law), Alexi Wood (St. Lawrence Barristers), Asher Honickman (Jordan Honickman Barristers), and Prof. Malcolm Lavoie (University of Alberta Faculty of Law). Watch the full video on our Member Area. The full recording contains 1 hour and 05 minutes of Professionalism Content (Law Society of Ontario).
Have the courts become political? In this encore episode from Law & Freedom 2025, Professor Ted Morton argues that changes in how Canadians view the role of our courts and the purpose of our constitution have politicized our courts. The full panel discussion, featuring three other speakers, can be found on our Member Area. Further reading: The Charter Revolution and the Court Party.
How does the Supreme Court of Canada decide which cases it hears? Paul-Erik Veel, adjunct professor at the University of Toronto, shares a fascinating quantitative analysis on the Court's decision-making, exploring everything from case selection and output to judicial agreement. Watch this full session on Runnymede's Member Area: https://runnymedesociety.ca/en/account/.
Can free expression be limited based on an administrative body's prediction of resulting harm? Can a university expel a student for having an opinion on a particular social issue that it considers unprofessional? Lia Milousis, lawyer with the Acacia Group and leader of our Ottawa lawyers' chapter, discusses two cases involving the prevention of harm as a reason for limiting freedom of speech.
Why were property rights excluded from the Charter? Professor Dwight Newman of the University of Saskatchewan joined students at the University of British Columbia's Peter A. Allard School of Law to discuss his research on this subject and the opportunity for further study on this topic.Further reading: Dwight Newman & Lorelle Binnion, "The Exclusion of Property Rights from the Charter: Correcting the Historical Record" (2015) 52:3 Alta. L. Rev. 543
Did the Law Society of Ontario's proposed Statement of Principles (SOP) present a threat to free speech? Today's encore episode features Lisa Bildy, a Bencher and lawyer specializing in freedom of expression cases, who spoke with our UWO student chapter about her experience standing up to the Law Society.
Is the Alberta Sovereignty Act a mechanism to provide a "shadow court" that challenges federal laws? Martin Olszynski, Professor of law at the University of Calgary and member of the federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada's advisory council on impact assessment, discusses the constitutionality of the Alberta Sovereignty Act.
How did Carter v Canada change the Canadian legal landscape? Today's encore episode of Runnymede Radio is from a discussion hosted by McGill's Runnymede chapter with Professors Yuan Yi Zhu, of Leiden University, and Stéphane Sérafin, of the University of Ottawa Faculty of Law. This episode features Jacob McConville, president of the Runnymede Society's chapter at McGill University, as guest host.
If law, including constitutional law, is downstream from politics, what are the implications for federalism in Canada? Barry Cooper, Professor of Political Science at the University of Calgary, joins Runnymede Radio to discuss the Free Alberta Strategy and its cornerstone, the Alberta Sovereignty Act, including the notion that this Act was drawn up as "unconstitutional on purpose".For further reading, take a look at "Geoffrey Sigalet and Jesse Hartery: The critics were wrong about Danielle Smith’s Alberta Sovereignty Act."
Does the Notwithstanding clause turn off rights protected by the Charter? Does it preserve those rights by requiring courts to stay silent while legislatures alone interpret their bounds? Or are courts always available to provide a remedy? This episode features political science professor Geoffrey Sigalet and lawyer Eric Mendelsohn.For further reading, take a look at the following articles: Grégoire Webber, Eric Mendelsohn & Robert Leckey "The faulty received wisdom around the notwithstanding clause" (Policy Options, 2019) Maxime St-Hilaire and Xavier Foccroulle Ménard, "Nothing to Declare: A Response to Grégoire Webber, Eric Mendelsohn, Robert Leckey, and Léonid Sirota on the Effects of the Notwithstanding Clause" (Constitutional Forum, 2020) Grégoire Webber, “Notwithstanding rights, review, or remedy? On the notwithstanding clause and the operation of legislation” (University of Toronto Law Journal, 2021) Robert Leckey & Eric Mendelsohn, “The Notwithstanding Clause: Legislatures, Courts, and the Electorate” ( University of Toronto Law Journal, 2022) Geoffrey Sigalet, "The Truck and the Brakes: Understanding the Charter's Limitations and Notwithstanding Clauses Symmetrically" (Supreme Court Law Review, 2022) Grégoire Webber, “The notwithstanding clause, the operation of legislation, and judicial review” (Queen's University Legal Research Paper, 2022) Geoffrey Sigalet, “Legislated Rights as Trumps: Why the Notwithstanding Clause Overrides Judicial Review” (Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 2023)
Is free speech protected in Canada? Christine Van Geyn, Litigation Director, and Josh Dehaas, Counsel, for the Canadian Constitution Foundation join us to talk about their latest book, "Free Speech in Canada." The book provides a history of this important right and how it has evolved. This episode features guest host Sam Benzaquen, Vice President of the Runnymede Society’s student chapter at McGill University.
How can legal professionals better understand the meaning of the Canadian constitution? MP Scott Reid and Michael J. Scott discuss Primary Documents, "a searchable database of historical documents relating to the drafting and adoption of the Constitution of Canada." Their work aims to facilitate legal research and provide a better understanding of Canada's constitutional law and history. For more information, take a look at their website, primarydocuments.ca.
Did Canada breach its constitutional agreement with Alberta, prompting the creation of the Alberta Sovereignty Act? Professor Geoffrey Sigalet from the University of British Columbia and Jesse Hartery, Ph.D. candidate at Melbourne Law School, discuss the Alberta Sovereignty Act. This episode features guest host Jacob McConville, president of the Runnymede Society's student chapter at McGill University. For further reading, take a look at their joint paper, "The Frontiers of Nullification and Anticommandeering: Federalism and Extrajudicial Constitutional Interpretation."
Thank you for listening to Runnymede Radio! Tim Haggstrom, the host of Runnymede Radio and the Runnymede Society's National Director, has a special message for our listeners, reflecting on this past season's episodes and discussing our idea for next season's theme: self-censorship in Canadian law schools. Feel free to contact us and send your ideas for next season by emailing us at communications@runnymedesociety.ca.
Can administrative decisions be shielded from judicial scrutiny by section 33 of the Charter? Professor Andy Yu from Western University discusses his forthcoming paper on whether legislators can pass on to administrative bodies the immunity afforded by the notwithstanding clause.
How can we remain committed to free speech while addressing misinformation and disinformation in our democracies? Has social media "aggravated the harm of speech and made legal responses less practical"? Professor Richard Moon of the University of Windsor dives into these important questions and more in his latest appearance on Runnymede Radio, building upon his latest book, The Life and Death of Freedom of Expression.
How will Bill C-63, commonly known as the Online Harms Act, impact Canada’s Human Rights Commission and Tribunal? Professor Dave Snow of the University of Guelph, discusses how descriptive statistics can help us understand the significant changes that Bill C-63 is expected to bring.
Should the Senate avoid adopting bills that invoke Section 33 and risk being struck down by the Charter? Professor Ryan Alford of Lakehead University’s Bora Laskin Faculty of Law breaks down a controversial motion introduced into the Senate in May 2024 that could lead to deadlock between the House of Commons and the Senate.
What is the force and scope of the Charter in administrative contexts? Professor Mark Mancini of Thompson Rivers University tackles this issue by taking a look at key cases that have marked significant shifts in the role that the Charter has played in administrative law.
Will the Power v Canada decision significantly shift the way that parliamentary privilege operates in Canada? Professor Philippe Lagassé of Carleton University and Professor Leonid Sirota of the University of Reading discuss the controversial Power decision and its impacts on the relationship between Canada’s legislative and judicial branches.
Let’s take a look at key moments in Runnymede history: its inception, core values, and plans for the future. Naomi Papavero, Operations and Communications Director of the Runnymede Society, sits down with Tim Haggstrom, Runnymede’s current National Director, and Joanna Baron, the founding National Director, to discuss how the Society has evolved over time.
In this final encore episode from Runnymede’s Law & Freedom 2024 national conference, Justice Malcolm Rowe of the Supreme Court of Canada delivers a keynote lecture on constitutionalism in a free and democratic society.
In this encore episode from Runnymede's Law & Freedom 2024 national conference, Mark Mancini of the University of British Columbia moderates a panel discussion on the Federal Court's ruling on the 2022 invocation of the federal Emergencies Act, featuring Professor Ryan Alford, Sujit Choudhry, and Professor Michelle Gallant.
In this encore episode from Runnymede's Law & Freedom 2024 national conference, Moira Lavoie of Reynolds Mirth Richards & Farmer LLP moderates a panel discussion on the state of administrative law in Canada, featuring Justice David Stratas of the Federal Court of Appeal, Jennifer Bernardo, and Mark Mancini. This episode has been accredited for 20 EDI professionalism minutes with the Law Society of Ontario.___Dans cet épisode bis de la conférence nationale Law & Freedom 2024 de Runnymede, Moira Lavoie de Reynolds Mirth Richards & Farmer LLP anime une table ronde sur l'état du droit administratif au Canada, avec le juge David Stratas de la Cour d'appel fédérale, Jennifer Bernardo et Mark Mancini. Cet épisode a été accrédité pour 20 minutes de professionnalisme EDI par le Barreau de l'Ontario.
In this encore episode from Runnymede's Law & Freedom 2024 national conference, Professor Gerard Kennedy of the University of Alberta moderates a panel discussion on emerging issues in the Canadian law of federalism with Professor Michelle Gallant, Paul Warchuk, and Samuel Beswick.___Dans cet épisode de la conférence nationale Law & Freedom 2024 de Runnymede, le professeur Gerard Kennedy de l'Université de l'Alberta anime une table ronde sur les questions émergentes dans le droit canadien du fédéralisme avec la professeure Michelle Gallant, Paul Warchuk et Samuel Beswick. Cet épisode est en anglais.
In this encore episode from Runnymede's Law & Freedom 2024 national conference, National Director Kristopher Kinsinger moderates a panel discussion on reputation and free expression in the practice of defamation law, featuring Adam Goldenberg, Asher Honickman, and Lorne Honickman. This episode has been accredited for 20 EDI professionalism minutes with the Law Society of Ontario.
In this encore episode from Runnymede's Law & Freedom 2024 national conference, Aaron Wudrick of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute moderates a panel discussion on emerging issues in the Canadian law of federalism with Brett Carlson, Patricia Paradis, Derek Ross, and Professor Mary Shariff.
In this encore episode from Runnymede's Law & Freedom 2024 national conference, Justice Peter Lauwers sits down with Chief Justice Michael Tulloch of the Ontario Court of Appeal for a fireside discussion on the rule of law and legal practice. This episode has been accredited for 20 EDI professionalism minutes with the Law Society of Ontario.
In this special episode of Runnymede Radio, guest host Jake McConville sits down with Professor Ryan Alford of Lakehead University and Stéphane Sérafin of the University of Ottawa to discuss the Quebec Court of Appeal's recent decision in Hak v. Quebec, concerning the constitutionality of Quebec's Act respecting the laicity of the state.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, Kristopher Kinsinger sits down with Jamie Cameron, professor emerita at Osgoode Hall Law School, and Richard Moon, professor at the University of Windsor’s Faculty of Law, to discuss the “forgotten freedom” of peaceful assembly.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, Kristopher Kinsinger sits down with Colton Fehr, Professor at the University of Saskatchewan’s College of Law, to discuss his recently released book, Judging Sex Work: Bedford and the Attenuation of Rights.
In this special episode of Runnymede Radio, guest hosts Xavier Foccroulle Ménard and Jake McConville sit down with Adrian Vermeule, the Ralph S. Tyler Professor of Constitutional Law at Harvard Law School, to discuss the development of doctrine and his 2022 book, Common Good Constitutionalism.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, Kristopher Kinsinger sits down with Kerri Froc, Professor at UNB Law and Derek Ross, Executive Director of Christian Legal Fellowship, to discuss the future of MAID Laws in Canada.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, host Kristopher Kinsinger sits down with Asher Honickman, partner with Jordan Honickman Barristers, to discuss recent changes in the law of defamation, including the Supreme Court of Canada’s 2023 decision in Hansman v Neufeld.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, Kristopher Kinsinger sits down with Lauren Heuser, the founding publisher and editor of Canadian Affairs, to discuss how the federal Online News Act has affected publishers both large and small.
In this special episode of Runnymede Radio, our Thompson Rivers University chapter president Trevor Ballantyne sits down with Professor David Livingstone, the chair of Vancouver Island University's Liberal Studies Department for a discussion of civic nationalism in Canada and the constitutionalism of Thomas D'Arcy McGee.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, our National Director Kristopher Kinsinger sits down with Preston Jordan Lim, an assistant professor at the Charles Widger School of Law at Villanova University. Professor Lim discusses his forthcoming article in the Dicey Law Review on the originalism of F.R. Scott.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, Professor Steven Penney of the University of Alberta's Faculty of Law discusses recent Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence on the guarantee against cruel and unusual punishment.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, long-time Runnymede friend and international lawyer Stephen Armstrong joins us to discuss his recent article in the Dicey Law Review on the constitutionality of 'Henry VII Clauses'.
This episode of Runnymede Radio is our encore presentation of panels from our Law & Freedom 2023 conference. This panel, on international law in Canadian courts, features Prof. Dwight Newman, lawyer James Yap, graduate student Kerry Sun, and was moderated by Gerard Kennedy.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, our National Director Kristopher Kinsinger sits down with Gerard Kennedy and Mark Mancini to discuss the differences between the Supreme Court of Canada and the Supreme Court of the United States and why, in their view, Canada's apex court should not be described as a partisan institution.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, our National Director Kristopher Kinsinger sits down with Jesse Hartery, former McGill Runnymede chapter president and current PhD candidate at Melbourne Law School, to discuss his ongoing research on the theory and doctrine of Canadian federalism.
This panel featuring Professor Jamie Cameron, Professor Faisal Bhabha, Professor Finn Makela, and Derek Ross is a conversation on the state of academic freedom in Canada today. Moderated by Aaron Wudrick.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, Philippe Lagassé of Carleton University sits down to discuss what the accession of King Charles III means for the monarchy in Canada.
George Avraam and Prof. Hoi Kong in a discussion moderated by Christine Van Geyn discuss recent Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence over section 15 of the Charter.
This episode of Runnymede Radio is a special encore presentation of one of our best events from the past school year in which Professor Faisal Bhabha sat down with Professor Dwight Newman to discuss what they refer to as the emerging constitutional cleaves at the Supreme Court of Canada. This event was originally hosted by our Osgoode Hall Law School chapter in February 2023.
Prof. Ryan Alford, Prof. Leah West, Asher Honickman, and Cara Zwibel discuss the Emergencies Act and the 'Freedom Convoy' in a conversation moderated by Prof. Malcolm Lavoie.Please note that this panel was recorded before the Public Order Emergency Commission released its report regarding the invocation of the Emergencies Act.
Prof. Yuan Yi-Zhu, Prof. Lisa Kerr, and Prof. Steven Penney discuss the future of Section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms following the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in R v Bissonnette. A conversation moderated by Jessica Kuredjian.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, Professor Ryan Alford (Bora Laskin Faculty of Law) and Cara Zwibel (Canadian Civil Liberties Association) join our National Director Kristopher Kinsinger to discuss what we might expect to happen in the aftermath of the Emergencies Act inquiry.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, our National Director Kristopher Kinsinger sits down with Brian Bird and Derek Ross. Brian and Derek are the co-editors of the recently released book Forgotten Foundations of the Canadian Constitution.
In this episode, our National Director Kristopher Kinsinger is joined by Yuan Yi Zhu and Kerry Sun to discuss the Supreme Court of Canada's recent R v Bissonnette decision, a topic they have written about for The Spectator magazine. Yuan Yi Zhu is a doctoral candidate in international relations and incoming research fellow at the University of Oxford. Kerry Sun is a distinguished Runnymede alumnus and graduate student of law, also at the University of Oxford.
This episode of our podcast is a special encore presentation from one of our best events of the previous academic year, in which Justice Peter Lauwers of the Court of Appeal for Ontario presents a lecture on what he calls 'an operating manual for the judicial mind'. This lecture was originally delivered at the annual Runnymede Student Summit in July 2021, and again at the University of Saskatchewan in March 2022.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, our National Director Kristopher Kinsinger sits down to discuss intellectual diversity with Geoffrey Sigalet, Assistant Professor in the Department of Economics, Philosophy, and Political Science at the University of British Columbia - Okanagan, and Director of the UBC Centre for Constitutional Law and Legal Studies.
In this episode, Professor Ryan Alford of Lake University Bora Laskin Faculty of Law joins Runnymede Radio host Kristopher Kinsinger to discuss Parliament's invocation of the Emergencies Act.
In this episode of Runnymede Radio, host Kristopher Kinsinger is joined by University of Ottawa professor Carissima Mathen to discuss her and Michael Plaxton's latest book, "The Tenth Justice."
This episode of Runnymede Radio features a conversation with Professor Emmett Macfarlane, Professor of Political Science and the University of Waterloo.
https://runnymedesociety.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/mark-mancini-intvw1.mp3
This episode of Runnymede Radio features a conversation with our former National Director Mark Mancini on the state of the rule of law in Canada. Please note that this episode was recorded prior to the federal government's revocation of the Emergencies Act.
Our first episode of Runnymede Radio for 2022 features our National Director Kristopher Kinsinger discussing the future of the Runnymede Society coalition.
This special episode of Runnymede Radio features Dr. Andy Summers of the London School of Economics Department of Law.
Joined by the the Runnymede Society's Thomas Falcone, Dr. Summers discusses his recent work with the UK Wealth Tax Commission and the rule of law implications surrounding the possible implementation of a tax on wealth.
https://runnymedesociety.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/podcast-january-11.mp3
Our first episode of Runnymede Radio for 2021 features Professor Malcolm Lavoie of the University of Alberta Faculty of Law discussing his recent University of Toronto Law Journal article, "The Implications of Property as Self-Government."
https://runnymedesociety.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/podcast-january-7.mp3
This month's episode of Runnymede Radio features a conversation with Dr. Gerard Kennedy from the University of Manitoba Robson Hall School of Law. Dr. Kennedy discusses the recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions in Atlantic Lottery and Nevsun and their relationship to the rule of law in private law jurisprudence.
https://runnymedesociety.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/podcast-october-26.mp3
This episode features a wide-ranging discussion with Mark Walters -- Dean of the Queen's University Faculty of Law -- on his upcoming book, A.V. Dicey and the Common Law Constitutional Tradition: ‘A Legal Turn of Mind’.
https://runnymedesociety.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/podcast-september-23b.mp3
Runnymede Radio is back!
This episode features Philippe Lagassé, associate professor and the Barton Chair at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs. Professor Lagassé and our National Director Mark Mancini discuss parliamentary prorogation in light of recent events in Ottawa. A timely and informative conversation.
https://runnymedesociety.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Runnymede-podcast-aug-28b.mp3
This episode features Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, the Member of Parliament for Beaches-East York – a riding he has represented since 2015. As a parliamentarian, Mr. Erskine-Smith currently sits on the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology.
Before politics, Mr. Erskine-Smith worked as a lawyer in Toronto. He obtained his undergraduate and law degrees from Queen’s University, and later obtained a postgraduate degree in law from the University of Oxford.
In this episode, Mr. Erskine-Smith speaks with Mark Mancini, the National Director of the Runnymede Society, about the federal government’s continuing response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, with particular focus on how this response implicates the rule of law, constitutionalism, and individual liberty.
This episode features Dr. Ryan Alford, an Associate Professor at the Bora Laskin Faculty of Law at Lakehead University.
Dr. Alford received his doctorate in public, constitutional, and international law from the University of South Africa. He also holds a master’s degree from the University of Oxford and a law degree from New York University. He is called to the Bar of Ontario and is a Bencher of the Law Society of Ontario.
In 2017, McGill-Queen’s University Press published his book entitled Permanent State of Emergency: Unchecked Executive Power and the Demise of the Rule of Law. In 2020, the same publisher will release his book entitled Seven Absolute Rights: Recovering the Foundations of Canada’s Rule of Law.
In this episode, Dr. Alford speaks with Mark Mancini, the National Director of the Runnymede Society, about emergency powers in Canada.
This episode of Runnymede Radio features Shannon Salter, the Chair of British Columbia’s Civil Resolution Tribunal – Canada’s first online tribunal.
Ms. Salter earned her BA and LLB from the University of British Columbia, and her LLM from the University of Toronto. She clerked at the Supreme Court of British Columbia before practising civil litigation at a Vancouver law firm for several years. In 2017, Ms. Salter was named one of the Top 25 Most Influential Lawyers in Canada. She is also an adjunct professor at UBC’s Allard School of Law, where she teaches administrative law and legal ethics.
Interviewed by Mark Mancini, the National Director of the Runnymede Society, Ms. Salter discusses the nature and work of the Civil Resolution Tribunal and how this administrative body is reshaping legal dispute resolution in British Columbia.
This episode of Runnymede Radio features Carissima Mathen, a law professor at the University of Ottawa. Interviewed by Mark Mancini, the National Director of the Runnymede Society, Professor Mathen discusses her book entitled Courts Without Cases: The Law and Politics of Advisory Opinions, released in 2019 by Hart Publishing. Below is a blurb describing the book. We hope you enjoy this episode of Runnymede Radio! Since 1875, Canadian courts have been permitted to act as advisors alongside their ordinary, adjudicative role. This book offers the first detailed examination of that role from a legal perspective. When one thinks of courts, it is most often in the context of deciding cases: live disputes involving spirited, adversarial debate between opposing parties. Sometimes, though, a court is granted the power to answer questions in the absence of such disputes through advisory opinions (also called references). These proceedings raise many questions: about the judicial role, about the relationship between courts and those who seek their 'advice', and about the nature of law. Tracking their use in Canada since the country's Confederation and looking to the experience of other legal systems, the book considers how advisory opinions draw courts into the complex relationship between law and politics. With attention to key themes such as the separation of powers, federalism, rights and precedent, this book provides an important and timely study of a fascinating phenomenon.
This episode of Runnymede Radio features Asher Honickman, a partner at Matthews Abogado LLP in Toronto. He is also the founder and CEO of Advocates for the Rule of Law, a legal think tank dedicated to promoting the rule of law in Canada. Interviewed by Mark Mancini, the National Director of the Runnymede Society, Asher discusses Canadian federalism, using two high-profile lawsuits – one concerning pipelines, the other concerning the federal carbon tax – as the basis for their conversation.
This episode of Runnymede Radio features Dr. Kerri Froc, an Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Law at the University of New Brunswick. Interviewed by Mark Mancini, the National Director of the Runnymede Society, Professor Froc discusses the intersection of feminism and originalism in the context of Canadian constitutional law and interpretation.
This episode of Runnymede Radio features Dr. Paul Daly, a member of the Faculty of Law (Common Law Section) at the University of Ottawa, where he holds a University Research Chair in Administrative Law and Governance. In this episode, Dr. Daly and Mark Mancini, the National Director of the Runnymede Society, discuss the much anticipated rulings of the Supreme Court of Canada in the so-called "administrative law trilogy", a trio of cases in which the Court has sought to clarify the law governing judicial review of administrative decisions in Canada.
Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov Bell Canada v. Canada (Attorney General)
This episode of Runnymede Radio features Dr. Geoffrey Sigalet, a postdoctoral fellow in the Research Group on Constitutional Studies at McGill University. Dr. Sigalet, interviewed by Mark Mancini, the National Director of the Runnymede Society, discusses a collection of essays he co-edited with Grégoire Webber (Queen's University) and Rosalind Dixon (University of New South Wales). The collection is entitled Constitutional Dialogue: Rights, Democracy, Institutions (2019, Cambridge University Press).
The blurb for Constitutional Dialogue captures the focus of the collection: The metaphor of 'dialogue' has been put to different descriptive and evaluative uses by constitutional and political theorists studying interactions between institutions concerning rights. It has also featured prominently in the opinions of courts and the rhetoric and deliberations of legislators. This volume brings together many of the world's leading constitutional and political theorists to debate the nature and merits of constitutional dialogues between the judicial, legislative, and executive branches. Constitutional Dialogue explores dialogue's democratic significance, examines its relevance to the functioning and design of constitutional institutions, and covers constitutional dialogues from an international and transnational perspective.
In the first Runnymede Radio episode of the 2019-2020 academic year, we speak with the new National Director of the Runnymede Society, Mark Mancini. We discuss the growth of Runnymede since its inception in 2016, recent campus events, the profile of Runnymede in The Globe and Mail, the inaugural Runnymede Fellows Program, and the upcoming Law and Freedom Conference in February 2020.
Paul Beaudry (University of Calgary's School of Public Policy) recently argued, in a Financial Post op-ed, that fears over net neutrality are overblown, that the regime in place since 2015 stifled investment and innovation, and that unwinding the 'open internet' order is good news for American consumers and the economy. We discuss his reasoning and the likely effect of the repeal on smaller content producers, as well as why the Canadian telecom industry is, for all of our hand-wringing, pretty good.
Links: Paul Beaudry and Martin Masse: Don't freak over ending net neutrality
Konrad von Finckenstein: Millenial moment: will the tech generation fight for net neutrality?
An autopsy of the Google memo with Marni Soupcoff, writer, commentator and policy analyst. Did Google have the legal and/or moral right to fire Damore for his memo on "Google's ideological echo chamber"? Is the incident a canary in the coalmine, or a microcosm for American society more broadly? What commonalities are there between the moral panic over the memo and that over sociologist Charles Murray's controversial research on race and IQ? How would greater epistemological humility serve us in cases like this one? Does Google's decision to fire Damore suggest that there is no refuge left for free speech, considering the decision in tandem with current university climates?
Links:
Google's Ideological Echo Chamber
Marni Soupcoff: Google axing someone for mouthing off was not a smart move
Marni Soupcoff: Damore's firing latest example of society's intolerance of controversial ideas
Sam Harris: Forbidden Knowledge
Steve Simpson, Director of Legal Studies at the Ayn Rand Institute, discusses why free speech is the killer app for Western civilization and why the most disconcerting threats to free speech occur on the level of culture rather than law. Why is the conversation about free speech so frequently focused on college campuses? How can educators overcome the human tendency to self-censor in order to hew to the crowd? What line can be drawn from the Salman Rushdie Satanic Verses controversy to the riots following the Jylland-Posten's publication of Muhammead cartoons to the terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo? How has the hyper-partisan climate in the United States affected intellectual freedom?
Links:
Symposium: Is Free Speech Under Threat in the United States?
Steve Simpson @ ARI
Part II of previous debate on the s. 33 notwithstanding clause with Leonid Sirota (AUT Law School), Maxime St-Hilaire (Université de Sherbrooke) and Geoff Sigalet (Stanford Law School). How should historical circumstances, in this case the intentions of parties to the adoption of the Charter, affect how we construe the proper use of its provisions in contemporary circumstances? Should s. 33 be limited to use in "exceptional circumstances"?
In May 2017, Saskatchewan premier Brad Wall announced his government's intention to respond to a court decision holding that public funding for non-Catholic students who wished to attend Catholic schools violated state obligations of religious neutrality by use of the Charter's notwithstanding clause. In this episiode, we debate the proposition: Regardless of the merits of the Good Spirit School Division decision, the government of Saskatchewan was justified in stating its intention to invoke the s. 33 notwithstanding clause in response to it. Participants: Maxime St-Hilaire, Université de Shebrooke, Leonid Sirota, AUT Law School, and Geoffrey Sigalet, Stanford Law School.
Links:
Saskatchewan's Brad Wall and the rehabilitation of the Charter
Chekhov's Gun
Les leçons de Jordan, III: À QUELLES CONDITIONS EST-IL LÉGITIME DE DÉROGER AUX DROITS CONSTITUTIONNELS FONDAMENTAUX?
Discussion with Professor Bruce Pardy, Queen's Faculty of Law and Asher Honickman, Advocates for the Rule of Law. What does Bill C-16 mean and how would alleged human rights violations under Bill C-16 be litigated? We discuss the Ontario Human Rights Commission's guidelines and how they might interact with an allegation of a Charter breach of freedom of expression, civility vs. legal obligations, classical conceptions of negative versus positive human rights, and some procedural and principled implications of Bill C-16.
Links: Professor Pardy's opening comments at the Senate's Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8ReMwdurlk Professor Pardy and Jordan Peterson debate Bill C-16 at Queen's Law: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzkNHpiJ7AE&t=1327s
Discussion with Brian Bird, D.C.L. candidate at McGill's Faculty of Law and author of "Trinity Western and the erosion of religious freedom": why did the case of Trinity Western University's proposed law school occasion a 'clash of the titans' in the form of two powerhouse appellate courts, Ontario and B.C., disagreeing with each other substantively? How can courts balance claims to religious liberty with demands for equality under the Charter? What should we make of the suggestion that allowing Trinity a law school would reduce the overall number of spots for gay law students in Canada? We engage in rampant speculation about the SCC's future decision and consider broader theoretical implications of religious liberty in a pluralistic society.
Runnymede now has an Amazon affiliate link! Simply follow runnymedesociety.ca/amazon, do your online shopping as you normally would, and a small percentage will support the Runnymede Society.
How has the Charter fundamentally changed Canadian politics? Discussion with Chief Justice (Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench) Glenn Joyal about Canada's founding ideological mélange and strands of liberal neutrality, communitarianism, and Westminster supremacy, the shift in political culture effectuated by the Charter, the notwithstanding clause, and how courts and legislatures can collaborate in articulating rights. CJ Joyal also responds to Leonid Sirota's critique of his speech.
Text of Chief Justice Joyal's speech: http://www.ruleoflaw.ca/the-charter-and-canadas-new-political-culture-are-we-all-ambassadors-now/
Discussion with Teresa Bejan of Oriel College, Oxford about her 2017 book Mere Civility, which contrasts the views on the limits of toleration in a liberal society of John Rawls, Thomas Hobbes, and Roger Williams, and defends Williams' 'mere civility' which was based on "mutual contempt" rather than mutual respect. We also discuss recent events at Middlebury and Wellesley College, identity politics' want for epistemic humility, and 'free speech fundamentalism'.
For more on Mere Civility, see this recent New York Times feature.
In the digital age, filter bubbles encourage conformity of opinion and confirmation bias. They discourage airing contrarian views-- both online and in person. A conversation with lawyer and journalist Lauren Heuser about the eroding culture of free speech, why polarizing figures like Milo Yiannopoulos should not be the mascots of free speech, and getting back to the real aims of open discourse for a free society. Read Lauren's Walrus piece here.
Law professor and longtime Volokh Conspiracy contributor Ilya Somin joins Runnymede Radio to make the case for open borders as favourable to both human freedom and economic prosperity. We touch on Trump's executive orders, the implications of the Trump administration's restrictionism for Canada's Safe Third Party Agreement, political ignorance and immigration, the reality of nationhood and reconciling immigration with shared civic values, and the political backlash against pro-immigration elites.
Leonid Sirota, Lecturer at AUT Law School in Auckland, New Zealand, and author of Double Aspect Blog, discusses originalism, the legal interpretive theory which posits that a law's original meaning should govern its subsequent interpretation and application. We discuss whether originalism has been rejected by Canadian courts, particularly the Supreme Court of Canada, the normative case for (and against) originalism, common criticisms, and why the 1L constitutional law staple Reference re Persons doesn't mean what you think it means.
Dr. Sirota's talk at the Université de Montréal can be viewed here.
Joanna and Montreal lawyer, writer, and podcaster Daniel Goldwater discuss Canadian exceptionalism and whether Trumpist nativism could land on Canadian shores, the 2017 Quebec City mosque shooting and why accused Alexandre Bisonette was charged with murder and not terrorism and half of the Bouchard-Taylor Commission's renunciation of that report's recommendations. As a bonus add-on: tackling the Andrew Potter affair (see the offending article here)!
Welcome to Runnymede Radio! Jordan Peterson discusses gender-neutral pronouns, the political uses of language, radical politics on university campuses, and why learning can be painful with Joanna Baron, Runnymede Society Director.
Video of Prof. Peterson's debate, with Prof. Bruce Pardy at Queen's University Faculty of Law, can be viewed here.