- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
“All of my proposals are constitutional,” Poilievre said.
“We will make them constitutional using whatever tools the constitution allows me to use to make them constitutional. I think you know exactly what I mean.”
You must log in or # to comment.
“All of my proposals are constitutional,” Poilievre said. “We will make them constitutional”
…but Trudeau is the government overreach guy, right CPC?
It’s not overreaching if it is them who does it.
Yeah. They have the right to rule, and ruling means doing whatever you want and forcing others to do it too. Anything that gets in the way of that – including not making government – is illegitimate and must be crushed.
Hold onto your rights folks, cause Pierre is promising to snatch them away.
You may not care about the constitutional rights of criminals, but maintaining the rights of the lowest of society is exactly how we protect those rights for everyone else. After the incarcerated, who is next?
I’ve read a number of articles claiming to demonstrate how many of the negative things our governments and corporations foist upon us were first used in prisons. They were then rolled out to the general public, starting with disadvantaged and marginalized communities.
It’s time for organizations like the John Howard Society to get more support so that they can be more vocal and more active.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre says he would use “whatever tools the constitution allows” to pass criminal justice laws if his party forms the next government.
Speaking to the Canadian Police Association on Monday, Poilievre promised to implement more stringent requirements for bail and make it harder for convicted murderers to transfer out of maximum security prisons.
Poilievre didn’t explicitly say what tools he was referring to and his office provided no official comment when asked for clarification.
In the past, the Tory leader said he would use the notwithstanding clause to overturn a 2022 Supreme Court decision that struck down a law that gave judges discretion to hand out consecutive, 25-year blocks of parole ineligibility if an offender has committed multiple first-degree murders.
Errol Mendes, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, told CBC News that in cases where the Supreme Court has made a ruling, the only option a government would have is using Section 33.
Quebec invoked the clause in passing a language reform law that limits the use of English in the public service.
The original article contains 462 words, the summary contains 178 words. Saved 61%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!