Unconstitutional or Just Unworkable? The Life and Death of a Prohibition on Floor-Crossing in Fletcher v the Government of Manitoba

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    Fletcher v the Government of Manitoba is the first reported challenge to a floor-crossing prohibition under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This case comment begins with the legislative history of the challenged provision and then provides an overview and critique of the reasons in Fletcher . Against this backdrop, it then reflects on the lessons of the case in two respects. The first is the difficulty in translating a policy idea into legislation – specifically, defining the conduct to be prohibited and determining the appropriate deterrent or penalty for breach. The second respect is the government’s role in defending legislation in court, particularly legislation that it considers to be bad policy and plans to repeal. The comment concludes that Fletcher ultimately demonstrates that governments should defend constitutionally viable laws in court – even laws that were adopted by a previous government and that are destined for repeal as bad policy.

    Original languageCanadian English
    JournalArticles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
    Volume42
    Issue number1
    Publication statusPublished - Oct. 31 2019

    Keywords

    • Manitoba
    • Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
    • Floorcrossing
    • Party switching
    • Legislation
    • Lawmaking
    • Attorney General

    Disciplines

    • Constitutional Law
    • Legislation

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Unconstitutional or Just Unworkable? The Life and Death of a Prohibition on Floor-Crossing in Fletcher v the Government of Manitoba'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this