Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pioneering the Charter forms part of a collection of articles in an edited volume commemorating the sesquicentennial anniversary of Canada’s Constitution. Dealing specifically with the period from 1985 to 2000, “Pioneering” argues that the Charter’s resilience today is grounded not only in the landmark successes of those years but also in its moments of greatest fragility. Three such moments stand out in this pioneer period: R. v. Morgentaler, which relied on a form of constrained activism to enforce the Charter and allow Parliament to respond; the Bill 101 cases, which vindicated the rights of linguistic minorities but explicitly made s.33’s override available as an answer to the Court’s decisions; and R. v. Daviault, which put the Charter’s conception of justice to the test by standing on principle for a thoroughly unsympathetic criminal defendant. This short article maintains that the Charter’s legitimacy was forged, in part, through the adversity of high-stakes decision-making. Whether and how the Court confronted and to some extent allayed lingering doubts about rights and the power of review is an important and intriguing part of the Charter’s legacy in this period.
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 | 0.012 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".