"Here finally is a book that unveils the politics that infuse Canadian courts and their decisions ... and warns us of the effects of a judicialized politics on our democratic traditions." - Leslie A. Pal, Carleton University

The first comprehensive examination of how the Charter influences political choices on social policy.

List of Tables and FiguresAcknowledgments1: Introduction 2: The Conditions for the Rights Revolution: Theory 3: The United States: Standard Explanations for the Rights Revolution 4: The Support Structure and the U.S. Rights Revolution 5: India: An Ideal Environment for a Rights Revolution? 6: India's Weak Rights Revolution and Its Handicap 7: Britain: An Inhospitable Environment for a Rights Revolution? 8: Britain's Modest Rights Revolution and Its Sources 9: Canada: A Great Experiment in Constitutional Engineering 10: Canada's Dramatic Rights Revolution and Its Sources 11: Conclusion: Constitutionalism, Judicial Power, and Rights App: Selected Constitutional or Quasi-Constitutional Rights Provisions for the United States, India, Britain, and Canada Notes Bibliography Index Copyright © Libri GmbH. All rights reserved.

Judge Robert H. Bork will deliver the Barbara Frum Historical Lecture at the University of Toronto in March 2002. This annual lecture “on a subject of contemporary history in historical perspective” was established in memory of Barbara Frum and will be broadcast on the CBC Radio program Ideas. In Coercing Virtue, former US solicitor general Robert H. Bork examines judicial activism and the practice of many courts as they consider and decide matters that are not committed to their authority. In his opinion, this practice infringes on the legitimate domains of the executive and legislative branches of government and constitutes a judicialization of politics and morals. Should courts be used as a vehicle of social change even if the majority view weighs against the court’s ruling? And if we allow courts to make law, especially in a country like Canada where our Supreme Court judges aren’t even elected, then what does this mean for democratic government? “The nations of the West have long been afraid of catching the “American disease” — the seizure by judges of authority properly belonging to the people and their elected representatives. Those nations are learning, perhaps too late, that this imperialism is not an American disease; it is a judicial disease, one that knows no boundaries.” — Robert H. Bork, from Coercing Virtue

The introduction of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982 was accompanied by much fanfare and public debate. This book does not celebrate the Charter; rather it offers a critique by distinguished scholars of law and political science of its effect on democracy, judicial power, and the place of Quebec and Aboriginal peoples twenty-five years later. By employing diverse methodological approaches, contributors shift the focus of debate from the Charter’s appropriateness to its impact – for better or worse – on political institutions, public policy, and conceptions of citizenship in the Canadian federation.

In this study, W. J. Waluchow argues that debates between defenders and critics of constitutional bills of rights presuppose that constitutions are more or less rigid entities. Within such a conception, constitutions aspire to establish stable, fixed points of agreement and pre-commitment, which defenders consider to be possible and desirable, while critics deem impossible and undesirable. Drawing on reflections about the nature of law, constitutions, the common law, and what it is to be a democratic representative, Waluchow urges a different theory of bills of rights that is flexible and adaptable. Adopting such a theory enables one not only to answer to critics' most serious challenges, but also to appreciate the role that a bill of rights, interpreted and enforced by unelected judges, can sensibly play in a constitutional democracy.