Four decades have passed since the adoption of the Constitution Act, 1982. Now it is time to assess its legacy. Constitutional Crossroads brings together an impressive assembly of established and rising stars of political science and law, who not only provide a robust account of the 1982 constitutional reform but also analyze the ensuing scholarship that has shaped our understanding of the Constitution. Contributors bypass historical description to offer reflective assessments of issues such as sovereignty, identity and pluralism, the scope and limits of rights, competing constitutional visions, the relationship between the state and Indigenous peoples, and the nature and methods of constitutional change.

Legislating under the Charter explores how governments and Parliament justify limitations on rights when advancing laws that raise rights concerns or when responding to judicial decisions under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Through an analysis of legislation concerning criminal justice policy, the approval of new safe consumption sites, sex work, and medical aid in dying, the book provides a detailed analysis of the extent and nature of parliamentary deliberation about rights, the extent to which government initiatives are properly scrutinized, and the broader institutional relationships under the Charter. The authors draw from a host of qualitative data, including research interviews and examination of judicial decisions, various bills under study, Hansard debates from the floor of the House of Commons, committee and Senate scrutiny of legislation, bureaucratic advice and Charter statements by the department of justice, and news media coverage. The book offers a set of concrete reform proposals to improve the transparency and accountability of executive and bureaucratic vetting processes, and to strengthen the role of Parliament in upholding constitutional values and holding the government to account. In doing so, Legislating under the Charter contributes to the broader comparative scholarship on models of judicial review, morality policy, policy change, and constitutionalism.

Four decades have passed since the adoption of the Constitution Act, 1982. Now it is time to assess its legacy. Constitutional Crossroads brings together an impressive assembly of established and rising stars of political science and law, who not only provide a robust account of the 1982 constitutional reform but also analyze the ensuing scholarship that has shaped our understanding of the constitution. Contributors bypass historical description to offer reflective assessments of issues such as sovereignty, identity and pluralism, the scope and limits of rights, competing constitutional visions, the relationship between the state and Indigenous peoples, and the nature and methods of constitutional change.

The Canadian Senate has long been considered an institutional pariah, viewed as an undemocratic, outmoded warehouse for patronage appointments and mired in spending and workload scandals. In 2014, the federal government was compelled to refer constitutional questions to the Supreme Court relating to its attempts to enact senatorial elections and term limits. Constitutional Pariah explores the aftermath of Reference re Senate Reform, which barred major unilateral alteration of the Senate by Parliament. Ironically, the decision resulted in one of the most sweeping parliamentary reforms in Canadian history, creating a pathway to informal changes in the appointments process that have curbed patronage and partisanship. Despite reinvigorating the Senate, Reference re Senate Reform has far-reaching implications for constitutional reform in other contexts. Macfarlane's sharp critique suggests that the Court's nebulous approach to the amending formula raises the spectre of a frozen constitution, unable to evolve with the country.

Legislating under the Charter explores how governments and Parliament justify limitations on rights when advancing laws that raise rights concerns or when responding to judicial decisions under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Through an analysis of legislation concerning criminal justice policy, the approval of new safe consumption sites, sex work, and medical aid in dying, the book provides a detailed analysis of the extent and nature of parliamentary deliberation about rights, the extent to which government initiatives are properly scrutinized, and the broader institutional relationships under the Charter. The authors draw from a host of qualitative data, including research interviews and examination of judicial decisions, various bills under study, Hansard debates from the floor of the House of Commons, committee and Senate scrutiny of legislation, bureaucratic advice and Charter statements by the department of justice, and news media coverage. The book offers a set of concrete reform proposals to improve the transparency and accountability of executive and bureaucratic vetting processes, and to strengthen the role of Parliament in upholding constitutional values and holding the government to account. In doing so, Legislating under the Charter contributes to the broader comparative scholarship on models of judicial review, morality policy, policy change, and constitutionalism.

The Canadian Senate has long been considered an institutional pariah, viewed as an undemocratic, outmoded warehouse for patronage appointments and mired in spending and workload scandals. In 2014, the federal government was compelled to refer constitutional questions to the Supreme Court relating to its attempts to enact senatorial elections and term limits. Constitutional Pariah explores the aftermath of Reference re Senate Reform, which barred major unilateral alteration of the Senate by Parliament. Ironically, the decision resulted in one of the most sweeping parliamentary reforms in Canadian history, creating a pathway to informal changes in the appointments process that have curbed patronage and partisanship. Despite reinvigorating the Senate, Reference re Senate Reform has far-reaching implications for constitutional reform in other contexts. Macfarlane’s sharp critique suggests that the Court’s nebulous approach to the amending formula raises the spectre of a frozen constitution, unable to evolve with the country.

As Canada's final court of appeal, the Supreme Court is a
crucial component of the country's legal system. Yet, for much of
its almost 140-year history, the highest court in the land dwelled in
relative obscurity. More than thirty years since the advent of the
"Charter of Rights and Freedoms, " which transformed the
court's function and thrust its work into the national spotlight,
many of us are still in the dark about the Supreme Court's role
-- in part because there has been relatively little empirical
investigation into how the institution works.
In "Governing from the Bench, " Emmett Macfarlane draws on
interviews with current and former justices, law clerks, and other
staff members of the court to shed light on the institution's
internal environment and decision-making processes. He explores the
complex role of the Supreme Court as an institution; exposes the rules,
conventions, and norms that shape and constrain its justices'
behaviour; and situates the court in its broader governmental and
societal context, as it relates to the elected branches of government,
the media, and the public. At once enlightening and engaging,
"Governing from the Bench" is a much-needed and comprehensive
exploration of an institution that touches the lives of all
Canadians.Emmett Macfarlane is an assistant professor in the
Department of Political Science at the University of Waterloo, Ontario.