Since the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was introduced in 1982, Canada has experienced countless debates on constitutional politics and about the future of Canada. There has, however, been no systematic attempt to identify general theories about Canada’s constitutional evolution. Patrick James corrects this oversight by using systemism to identify and assess five theories within the liberal and communitarian paradigms and within the context of major issues such as the role of the courts and the status of Aboriginal peoples. By adding clarity to familiar debates, this succinct assessment of major writings on constitutional politics sharpens our vision of the past - and the future - of the Canadian federation.

The Canadian constitutional reforms of 1982, which included a Charter of Rights and Freedoms analogous to the American Bill of Rights, brought about a convergence with American constitutional law. As in the U.S., Canadian courts have shown themselves highly protective of individual rights, and they have not been shy about assuming a leading and sometimes controversial political role in striking down legislation. In clear and easy-to-understand language, the contributors not only chart, but also explore, the reasons for areas of similarity and difference in the constitutional politics of Canada and the United States.

Essential Readings in Canadian Constitutional Politics introduces students, scholars, and practitioners to classic authors and writings on the principles of the Canadian Constitution as well as to select contemporary material. To complement rather than duplicate the state of the field, it deals with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and with Canadian mega-constitutional politics in passing only, focusing instead on institutions, federalism, intergovernmental relations, bilingualism and binationalism, the judiciary, minority rights, and constitutional renewal. Many of the selections reverberate well beyond Canada's borders, making this volume an unrivalled resource for anyone interested in constitutional governance and democratic politics in diverse societies.

In Governing with the Charter, James Kelly clearly demonstrates that our current democratic deficit is not the result of the Supreme Court’s judicial activism. On the contrary, an activist framers’ intent surrounds the Charter, and the Supreme Court has simply, and appropriately, responded to this new constitutional environment. While the Supreme Court is admittedly a political actor, it is not the sole interpreter of the Charter, as the court, the cabinet, and bureaucracy all respond to the document, which has ensured the proper functioning of constitutional supremacy in Canada. Kelly analyzes the parliamentary hearings on the Charter and also draws from interviews with public servants, senators, and members of parliament actively involved in appraising legislation to ensure that it is consistent with the Charter. He concludes that the principal institutional outcome of the Charter has been a marginalization of Parliament and that this is due to the Prime Minister’s decision on how to govern with the Charter.

Consolidated as of April 17, 1982.

Marking the Sesquicentennial of Confederation in Canada, this book examines the growing global influence of Canada's Constitution and Supreme Court on courts confronting issues involving human rights.

In this collection the authors challenge the "myth of the sacred" - the idea that certain aspects of the constitutional process - judicial political behaviour, interest group politics, and centralization of power - are untouchable politically. They suggest that certain actors and institutions have contributed to a myth about the normative basis of Canadian constitutional politics, a myth perpetuated through the popular media as well as much of the scholarly literature. Such actors often disguise their overtly political behavior with a cloak of impartiality, presenting their actions as furthering the public good and therefore immune to challenge. The Myth of the Sacred seeks to challenge this ideal. At its core this myth embodies the Trudeauian ideal of Canadian society - one that features a constitution that empowers impartial judges at the expense of politically motivated legislators; one that allows each individual to enjoy a uniform range of rights, freedoms, and means of belonging to the larger Canadian society; and one that seeks to ensure the primacy of the national government rather than the provincial. Trudeau called his vision the Just Society. But justice is an illusive and amorphous concept. Defining it, much less institutionalizing it, is fraught with risk. In modern liberal democracies, justice is typically understood as the product of some mix of liberty and equality, process and substance, with the amount of each component varying according to taste. It is not unusual for political actors to seek to institutionalize their own formulas for justice, but it is also not reasonable to expect these formulas to go unchallenged. Such a challenge represents the dominant theme of this volume. Contributors include Donald E. Abelson, Tom Flanagan (University of Calgary), Patrick James, James B. Kelly (Brock University), Michael Lusztig, Christopher P. Manfredi (McGill University), Hudson Meadwell (McGill University), Anthony A. Peacock (Utah State University), Mark Rush (Washington and Lee University), and Shannon I. Smithey (Kent State University).