Courting Constitutional Danger: Constitutional Conventions and the Legacy of the Patriation Reference

Abstract

The legacy of the Supreme Court’s decisions in the Patriation Reference and the Quebec Veto Reference is more political than jurisprudential. In particular, the Supreme Court’s decision on the justiciability of constitutional conventions has created a dangerous precedent whereby political actors attempt to manipulate the courts into influencing a particular political outcome. The election of May 2, 2011 presented precisely such a dangerous opportunity. This paper develops the concept of “constitutional danger”, the idea that certain actions may constitute threats to our constitutional order. It does so by linking the events of the springs of 1981 and 2011. The paper asserts that by answering the convention question and assuming the power to “recognize” constitutional conventions, the Supreme Court courted constitutional danger. The Supreme Court has developed practical ways of avoiding adjudicating such crises; however, the embers of future constitutional crises are still smouldering in the pages of the Patriation Reference.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 10 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.