“This Charter applies…”: The Supreme Court of Canada’s Fundamental Error in the Trinity Western University decisions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I. IntroductionThere has been an ongoing battle between Trinity Western University and the Federation of Law Societies of Canada — the national organization of the law societies that govern the legal profession in Canada — over whether Canada’s law societies will recognize JDs from the law faculty that Trinity Western wishes to establish. At the heart of this controversy is the fact that Trinity Western University, as an avowedly Christian, and some might say conservative, university, requires all of its faculty, staff, and students to sign a Community Covenant. Among other things, this Community Covenant prohibits “sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman.”1 A student’s failure to comply with the Covenant could result in disciplinary measures, including suspension and possibly expulsion.2 Several law societies, including the Law Society of British Columbia and the (as it was then known) Law Society of Upper Canada, denied accreditation to Trinity Western’s proposed law faculty because of this Community Covenant...
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".