Bibliographic record
Abstract
was the second woman appointed to the Supreme Court of Canada, and the first from Quebec.This deeply researched biography takes us from the judge's origins and life in the Quebec of the 1920s to the present.The portrait of Quebec society in the 1920s through the 1950s wonderfully enriches the book's comprehensive, intimate, and insightful examination of Justice L'Heureux-Dubé herself.We learn a great deal about the role of women and women lawyers in Quebec society, the Quebec legal profession, legal education, and the judiciary as we trace L'Heureux-Dubé's rise in the province's legal hierarchy to the Court of Appeal and then to the Supreme Court of Canada in 1987.Our understanding of the Supreme Court of Canada during the early Charter era is also considerably augmented by this account, which deals with the gender and cultural dynamics, the relations between Anglophone and Francophone judges, and the jurisprudential debates and controversies of the period.The book also takes us beyond Justice L'Heureux-Dubé's retirement and into the various high-profile interventions she made in public life, including her contribution to the Quebec Charter of Values debate.This book is essential reading for anyone interested in Canada's and Quebec's modern legal history, in the role of women in law, and in what made this judge such a compelling personality.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.395 | 0.247 |
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".