Professor Waldron Goes to Canada (One More Time): The Canadian Charter and the Counter-Majoritarian Difficulty
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper addresses the legitimacy of the Canadian system of judicial review of state action for compliance with constitutional rights. It recalls the lively and sophisticated debate that took place on that issue within the larger process of federal–provincial negotiations surrounding the ‘patriation’ of the Constitution. It is suggested that in many ways that public debate parallels that which is still going on among well-known academics such as Jeremy Waldron and Ronald Dworkin, among others. Since the constitutional entrenchment of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982, Canadian courts have been given the power to rule on and remedy violations of fundamental rights by the state. However, the Charter also includes what is often termed a ‘notwithstanding’ clause, which enables legislatures to shield legislative provisions from judicial review as long as this will is clearly expressed. Hence the paper further discusses whether such a clause can satisfy principled opponents to judicial review, more particularly whether it can meet the concerns expressed by Jeremy Waldron over the last 15 years or so. It is concluded that it cannot.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it