Resetting the Foundations: Renewing Freedom of Expression under Section s.2(b) of the Charter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 40th anniversary of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms on April 17, 2022 is a time for reckoning, and an opportunity to ready s.2’s fundamental freedoms for the future. In particular, this article offers a moment of pause to invest in s.2(b)’s guarantee of expressive freedom and its renewal. The discussion begins by addressing s.2(b)’s “fault lines”, which are embedded in the jurisprudence at both stages of the analysis – breach as well as justification. What then follows is a proposal for renewal that begins, under s.2(b), with a theory or principle of freedom and a revised approach to the question of breach. Specifically, the proposal eliminates Irwin Toy’s purpose-effects test and replaces it with s.2(a)’s standard of infringement, from Syndicat Northwest v. Amselem. To complete s.2(b)’s renewal it is necessary, under s.1, to eliminate the contextual approach and re-invigorate the Oakes test. Taking these steps and engaging this process of renewal can place s.2(b) on principled foundations and constrain the power of legislatures and regulators to infringe the Charter’s guarantee of expressive freedom.
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 | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".