Hi everybody--I'm Scott from Lawyers, Guns & Money.  Many thanks to Ezra for allowing me to post at his terrific blog, and to have included me in such a distinguished group of writers.

I thought I would make a few extremely wonky posts about democracy and judicial power, while relying on the other fine guest bloggers to provide posts that you will want to read.  In my recent post about the Canadian Supreme Court’s decision to strike down a Quebec law banning the sale of private health insurance, a couple commenters asked about Canada’s “Notwithstanding” clause, which Matthew Yglesias has also endorsed recently. So I thought I’d explain it, as an introduction to thinking about judicial review and its democratic legitimacy...

You need to be logged in to comment.
(If there's one thing we know about comment trolls, it's that they're lazy)

Connect
, after login or registration your account will be connected.
Advertisement