this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2024
56 points (98.3% liked)

Canada

7203 readers
262 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca/


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

"All of my proposals are constitutional," Poilievre said.

"We will make them constitutional using whatever tools the constitution allows me to use to make them constitutional. I think you know exactly what I mean."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre says he would use "whatever tools the constitution allows" to pass criminal justice laws if his party forms the next government.

Speaking to the Canadian Police Association on Monday, Poilievre promised to implement more stringent requirements for bail and make it harder for convicted murderers to transfer out of maximum security prisons.

Poilievre didn't explicitly say what tools he was referring to and his office provided no official comment when asked for clarification.

In the past, the Tory leader said he would use the notwithstanding clause to overturn a 2022 Supreme Court decision that struck down a law that gave judges discretion to hand out consecutive, 25-year blocks of parole ineligibility if an offender has committed multiple first-degree murders.

Errol Mendes, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, told CBC News that in cases where the Supreme Court has made a ruling, the only option a government would have is using Section 33.

Quebec invoked the clause in passing a language reform law that limits the use of English in the public service.


The original article contains 462 words, the summary contains 178 words. Saved 61%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!