SCC Justice John Major to retire soon

[mirror]

Major to retire from Supreme Court

Supreme Court Justice John Major to retire at Christmas

Mr Dithers talked a lot about the democratic deficit before he was elected. So far he has produced zilch. Will he put his words into action here? I seriously have my doubts.

Major I believe is from the West.

When was there last a supreme court justice from BC?

[shoop]

I don't really understand the Quebec element in those links.

Quebec has traditionally always had three supremes. They have three supremes now and Major is from Ontario.

Why the mention of Quebec's request to be involved in the process of picking new justices? All provinces should be involved?

[mirror]

Major was born in Ontario but is from the West. He was on the Alberta Court of Appeal before being appointed to the Supreme Court.

Quebeckers has by far the most astute electorate in the country. What Quebec wants, Quebec usually gets. Being a minority Quebeckers have learnt how to play the game.

[donvonbra]

Mr Dithers talked a lot about the democratic deficit before he was elected. So far he has produced zilch. Will he put his words into action here? I seriously have my doubts.

What, an open process to appoint a Supreme Court justice like they do in the US? Gadzooks, what next? Elected senators!

[Guest eureka]

There would be no "open process" in replacing the informal one that exists now with a formal process.

What there would be is a politicization of the Supreme Court a la USA.

When will you people wake up.

[Yaro]

There would be no "open process" in replacing the informal one that exists now with a formal process.

What there would be is a politicization of the Supreme Court a la USA.

When will you people wake up.

This is worth reading twice.

[BHS]

Imagine that. Politics involved in lawmaking in a democratic country.

[donvonbra]

There would be no "open process" in replacing the informal one that exists now with a formal process.

What there would be is a politicization of the Supreme Court a la USA.

When will you people wake up.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Appointing a SC justice IS part of the political process. The objective is to make it open, fair, allowing public input without turning the process into a circus. Right now it is a purely closed procedure.

[Yaro]

Imagine that. Politics involved in lawmaking in a democratic country.

The court has nothing to do with lawmaking. and the system that you propose will change that alot fast then the status quo has.

Appointing a SC justice IS part of the political process. The objective is to make it open, fair, allowing public input without turning the process into a circus. Right now it is a purely closed procedure.

The objective is to have non partisan justices who rule according to the principles there supposed to and the current system has accomplished that.

[BHS]

The court has nothing to  do with lawmaking. and the system that you propose will change that alot fast then the status quo has.

* * *

The objective is to have non partisan justices who rule according to the principles there supposed to and the current system has accomplished that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Since the advent of the Charter of Rights, the Canadian Supreme Court has taken more than it's share of leeway in "interpreting" our constitution to suit their personal opinions. Decisions based on ideas from outside of the constitution as it is written are political by their nature.

How do you know that the judges are non-partisan? Because Paul Martin told you so? Don't be ridiculous. There's no way for any of us to know what sort of prejudices Supreme Court appointees bring with them to the bench, and that 's part of the problem.

If you want to eliminate politics from the process entirely, why not have the Supremes pick their own replacements? Wouldn't that, by your logic, make the system even better?

[Argus]

Imagine that. Politics involved in lawmaking in a democratic country.

The court has nothing to do with lawmaking. and the system that you propose will change that alot fast then the status quo has.

The court seems to make more laws than the government these days. You can quibble with the term but the end result is the same.

The objective is to have non partisan justices who rule according to the principles there supposed to and the current system has accomplished that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah. Sure. Load a heaping load of wet manure into a pit and let it sit on a hot, steamy week and it'll still smell better than that statement.

Our judges are chosen for who they know, and for what their politics are. Legal acumen and knowledge, wisdom and the ability to articulate their learned opinions - all that plays little or no part in the process. Provide free legal services for the Liberal Party and Presto! you're a judge. Suck up at enough parties and Presto! You're on the appeals court. Then it's just a matter of being from the right sex, ethnic group and province when an opening appears. Mind you, the latest appointments also had to be of the proper mentality on a specific question - that being homosexual rights, because PM wanted to stack the court on that issue.

Non political pricess? Our Court!? Non-partisan? Our Court!? Principles? Our Court?!

[Argus]

Mr Dithers talked a lot about the democratic deficit before he was elected. So far he has produced zilch. Will he put his words into action here? I seriously have my doubts.

People didn't understand what he meant. He was concerned that HE didn't have enough say, that HE didn't have enough power. He didn't care about YOU, or anyone else.

Since assuming power PM has actually amassed even more power to the PMO and himself than was the case under Chretien. It's interesting that people talk about the GG being a mere figurehead but under Paul Martin even senior cabinet ministers are little more than figureheads, too. They're puppets with no independance, no voice, no real power. All power rests with the PMO. Think about it. Does anyone look to his cabinet ministers (never mind his MPs) on any issue for enlightenment, for new policy, for answers? They're almost as much a bunch of nobodies as his MPs. PM has the first, last and only say on all major issues. And you'll know the first cabinet minister who dares to seriously disagree with him by the fact they'll be an "ex" cabinet minister.

[kimmy]

Major I believe is from the West.

When was there last a supreme court justice from BC?

Beverly McLachlin is Alberta-born, but her legal career was in BC.

It appears to me that there are currently 3 Supreme Court judges Quebec, 3 from Ontario, 1 from BC, one Maritimer, and Major is from the prairies. If regional balance is a consideration, then Major's replacement would likely come from the prairies as well.

Martin will no doubt have his crew of legal experts out scouring the prairies for the gayest, most liberal judge he can find. Or better yet, he could search the Territories to find an Inuit judge! That would be way cool!

-k

[Shady]

I would like to see us actually institute some type of democratic process instead of the current Canadian monarchy. At least in America there's political process in which elected officals advise and consent. Here in Canada, King Paul gets to pick pretty much however he wants without any political opposition.

[donvonbra]

I would like to see us actually institute some type of democratic process instead of the current Canadian monarchy.  At least in America there's political process in which elected officals advise and consent.  Here in Canada, King Paul gets to pick pretty much however he wants without any political opposition.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't care about the monarchy. It's totally irrelevant to me and doesn't affect me in way. But for important posts like SC justices it can't be just left up to the head of government to make the decision. There needs to be some form of legislative oversight before such an appointment is finalized.

[Argus]

Martin will no doubt have his crew of legal experts out scouring the prairies for the gayest, most liberal judge he can find. Or better yet, he could search the Territories to find an Inuit judge! That would be way cool!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, there is actually pressure to replace the retiring Judge Major with an aborigine.

Native needed on SC

Maybe we could find a gay French speaking judge somewhere in the West? Preferably a Hindu immigrant with one leg. We desperately need the first disabled gay immigrant visible miniority Supreme Court Judge!

However, I suspect something more is required, if we examine the list of current judges perhaps we can discern the government's primary requirement for an SC judge.

Morris Fish - Anglophone, born and raised in QUEBEC

Marie Deschamps - Francophone, born and raised in QUEBEC

Louis LeBel - Francophone, born and raised in QUEBEC

Rosalie Abella - Anglophone, born and raised in Ontario

William Binnie - Anglophone, born and raised in QUEBEC

Michel Bastarch - Francophone, born in New Brunswick, went to university in QUEBEC.

John Major, Anglophone, born in Ontario, went to university in QUEBEC, married a Francophone Quebecer.

Louise Charron, Francophone, born and raised in Ontario

Beverly McLachlin, Anglophone, born and raised in Alberta

[I Miss Trudeau]

Mind you, the latest appointments also had to be of the proper mentality on a specific question - that being homosexual rights,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In actuality, any potential SC justice that opposed SSM would be unqualified for the job.

[Argus]

Mind you, the latest appointments also had to be of the proper mentality on a specific question - that being homosexual rights,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In actuality, any potential SC justice that opposed SSM would be unqualified for the job.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think in your opinion anyone who opposes SSM is unqualified for citizenship.

[mirror]

Major I believe is from the West.

When was there last a supreme court justice from BC?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Beverly McLachlin is Alberta-born, but her legal career was in BC.

It appears to me that there are currently 3 Supreme Court judges Quebec, 3 from Ontario, 1 from BC, one Maritimer, and Major is from the prairies. If regional balance is a consideration, then Major's replacement would likely come from the prairies as well.

Martin will no doubt have his crew of legal experts out scouring the prairies for the gayest, most liberal judge he can find. Or better yet, he could search the Territories to find an Inuit judge! That would be way cool!

-k

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks and

[I Miss Trudeau]

I think in your opinion anyone who opposes SSM is unqualified for citizenship.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'll do you one better. Anyone who opposes SSM is unqualified for personhood.

For your part, you don't seem to believe that an understanding of this nations laws is a prerequisite for a seat on the SCC.

[mirror]

Can't we move on from SSM. now? The dirty deal is done, the debate is over. Once again Canada shows Americans what real Christianity is all about. Most of the mainstream churches will support SSM within a short perrios of time. Lutherans are addressing the issue, the United Church, the Unitarian Church and the Anglican churches have already dealt with the issue, and quite frankly who cares what RCs think any more. They have become the laughing stock of the nation.

[donvonbra]

Can't we move on from SSM. now? The dirty deal is done, the debate is over. Once again Canada shows Americans what real Christianity is all about. Most of the mainstream churches will support SSM within a short perrios of time. Lutherans are addressing the issue, the United Church, the Unitarian Church and the Anglican churches have already dealt with the issue, and quite frankly who cares what RCs think any more. They have become the laughing stock of the nation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Laughing stock? I'm not sure I would go that far. If there is a top candidate for laughing stock-designate I would nominate Stephen Harper.

The Church of Rome has become irrelevant. Part of that is a normal process of secularization that has been on-going since the Reformation and more recently by the efforts of several of the hierarchy to cover-up crimes committed by priests. The stature of the RC Church has not of course been helped by some bizarre attacks on the Harry Potter books and the novel "The Da Vinci Code". The church does not seem to be aware that these are not theological treatises but in fact works of fiction.

don

[mcqueen625]

From my perspective, I believe our Supreme Court Justices should eb elected by the people, since they semm to be making the laws in this country it only stands to reason that they should be held accountable for those decisions by someone, and why not the people of Canada? After all it is us that are expected to live with these decisions in the long run.

We have this unelected and aunaccountable body demanding that Parliament change laws, and not only change them but these judges instruct our elected parliamentarians how the law is to read, and that is not democracy, that is dictatorship, pure and simple. It is not bad enough that these unaccountable appointees are ordering our elected officials around, but our elected officails are jsut shrugging their shoulders and telling us that they have no choice but to follow the orders given. We may as well be living in Cuba, North Korea, China or some other totalitarian state, if this is how our coutry is going to be run.

We need real reform in this country and it certainly isn't going to spring from the "Charter", since this is apparently where the judiciary had derived their power. We can change our government, but as long as we have an unelected and unaccountable judiciary continuing to make the rules, nothing is going to change. We need to scarp the "Charter, and strip power away from the judiciary, in order to effect change.

[BHS]

Can't we move on from SSM. now? The dirty deal is done, the debate is over. Once again Canada shows Americans what real Christianity is all about. Most of the mainstream churches will support SSM within a short perrios of time. Lutherans are addressing the issue, the United Church, the Unitarian Church and the Anglican churches have already dealt with the issue, and quite frankly who cares what RCs think any more. They have become the laughing stock of the nation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"Real Christianity"? Who made you the judge? This entire posts illustrates nothing more than your ignorance and your prejudice.

Roman Catholics make up half of the population of this country. In any case, I don't think that anyone is laughing at the Vatican's decision to adhere to biblical guidance and church tradition on the issue. They may not like it, but they aren't laughing.

The Anglican Church's position is that it is against SSM. It is the American branch, the Episcopal Church, that has broken away from this stance. (So much for showing the Americans.)

Since when have the Unitarians been a guiding light on any issue pertaining to Christianity? What sort of person making a serious post on Christian issues would make reference to the Unitarians at all? Someone who doesn't know what they're talking about.

[mcqueen625]

Can't we move on from SSM. now? The dirty deal is done, the debate is over. Once again Canada shows Americans what real Christianity is all about. Most of the mainstream churches will support SSM within a short perrios of time. Lutherans are addressing the issue, the United Church, the Unitarian Church and the Anglican churches have already dealt with the issue, and quite frankly who cares what RCs think any more. They have become the laughing stock of the nation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually you are quite wrong in your opinion about Christians being accepting of SSM. Anglican have not accepted the concept, only a few parishes have done so. In fact they and the Anglican Church in the US that elected an openly gay Bishop has been asked not to attend the World Church Conference. The mass of all faith's is not accepting at all, including most Christian denominations, Buddists, Islam, Jews, Hindu. In fact our External Affairs Minister has warned Gay and Lesbian couples from Canada to use caution when travelling, because homosexuality in many countries is against the law, punishable by arrest, imprisonment, lashing, or even the death penalty in certain countries. So you are dead wrong in your assertions that churches in Canada will soon accept the gay lifestyle choice.

The Supreme Court and the Parliament of Canada can pass all the laws they want, but when people are brought up to believe that Marriage is the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, no law is going to change that mindset. Although there is pleasure in the act of sex, the real reason for the act is to reproduce the species, and that is not possible for two people of the same gender, whether it be wild animal or human. The truth is that no amount of sex between two members of the same gender is ever going to produce an offspring.

According to Census figures the United Church has lost 8% of their members since 1999. In my city the United Church who married a gay couple a few years ago, lost over 90% of their congregation and they wound up selling the building. They now meet in a small room in a former paper-bag factory, and all of them are either gay or supporters of the gay lifestyle choice.. So much for being accepted by the United Church.