Sometimes Constitutions are Made in the Streets: the Future of the Charter’s Notwithstanding Clause
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the future of section 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the notwithstanding clause)1 — specifically, its po- litical future. It explores whether it is a consti- tutional instrument which is likely to be used in the future by legislatures or by Parliament.2 The article is premised on the idea that popular po- litical notions about political and constitutional legitimacy, while often formed by the constitu- tional text, sometimes evolve independently of the text. When this happens, these new concep- tions of legitimacy will constrain the exercise of constitutional powers no matter how clearly the powers are conferred by the text. From this per- spective, this article argues that in an apparent regime of entrenched rights, such as Canada’s, the legislative suspension of rights will be re- garded as less reflective of the constituted order — and, hence, less legitimate — than will hav- ing legislatures insist that their choices should prevail over constitutional rights in some cir- cumstances.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".