Lavoie v. Canada: Reconciling Equality Rights and Citizenship-Based Law
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the tension between citizenship-based law and equality rights in the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Lavoie v. Canada, [2002] 1 S.C.R. 769. The author argues that the decision in Lavoie marks a retreat from the Court's recognition in Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 143 of the inherently discriminatory nature of citizenship preference provisions. By examining the historical context of the concept of citizenship, this article emphasizes the historical connection between discrimination and citizenship-based laws. The author argues that in overlooking the historical context of citizenship, the Court in Lavoie also overlooked the potential discriminatory impact of citizenship-based laws. f in future cases, the Court takes into account the potential discriminatory impact of citizenship preference provisions, the author concludes such provisions will not likely be upheld as a justifiable limit of rights under section I of the Charter.
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 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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".