What is the current state of the law on "originalism" in the context of constitutional interpretation?
Yukon, Canada
The following excerpt is from Ross River Dena Council v. Canada (Attorney General), 2013 YKCA 6 (CanLII):
Our legal system has consistently rejected “originalism” – the idea that the intentions of the drafters of constitutional documents forever govern their interpretation – as a constitutional precept (Edwards v. Canada (Attorney General), 1929 CanLII 438 (UK JCPC), [1930] A.C. 124).
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
How have courts interpreted the meaning of the word “proceeding” in the context of the English Limitation Act? (Yukon, Canada)
What is the current state of the law on probability of malice? (Yukon, Canada)
What is the current state of the law on physician negligence? (Yukon, Canada)
What is the current state of the law in England and Wales with respect to the doctrine of "no" reasoning? (Yukon, Canada)
What is the test for the interpretation of a clause in a commercial contract where the contract states that the contract does not contain any specific terms? (Yukon, Canada)
What is the test for a constitutional duty to consult in this treaty? (Yukon, Canada)
What is the impact of a call for tender in the context of a procurement process? (Yukon, Canada)
What is the scope of consultation required by First Nations First Nations in the context of the consultation process? (Yukon, Canada)
How have the reasons of a tribunal decision been interpreted by chambers judges? (Yukon, Canada)
What is the state of the law in relation to the THFA? (Yukon, Canada)
