Is it purely advisory or does it have some teeth? Have their been any cases where the constitution has affected the outcome of a court decision?

  • kiwihereticOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    That doesn’t sound so temporary. Also not sure what freedom of speech has to do with freedom to spend money. I got a bit lost there.

    However it does seem to explain how it was overruled during the Ottawa protests.

    • festus
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The notwithstanding clause has to get renewed every 5 years, that’s the temporary part.

      Regarding speech and money, the idea the US Supreme Court has is that restrictions on buying advertising to support a candidate during an election is a restriction on speech. I’d agree that the link is somewhat tenuous.

    • SlikPikker
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Essentially, Canadians have no inherent or inalienable rights.