Supreme Court Gets This One Right

This post will probably be misinterpreted, but I am glad that the Little Sister’s bookstore lost it’s fight to have the legal battle paid for by tax payers. This case has absolutely nothing to do with gay and lesbian literature. But to me, the SCC got it right because they are not creating a separate path for charter challenges.

Little Sister’s wanted to take Canada Customs to court for detaining many of its imported gay and lesbian material at the border, including books, videos, and magazines. They said the agency has been engaged in censorship, with no one overseeing their decisions on what constitutes obscenity.

But the cost of such a battle would have been around $2 million. The store said they had already spent more than $500,000 on the case and wanted Ottawa to pick up the tab for them to move ahead with their Charter challenge.

“But the court ruled the case didn’t meet the threshold of exceptional case,” CTV’s Rosemary Thompson reported from the halls of the Supreme Court.

“The courts are saying they don’t want to create a parallel system of legal aid. They’re saying that only in the most exceptional circumstance where a case has broad implications can you argue that you need the government to front your costs.”

Well thank goodness for small miracles. And my reason for saying that is that I am getting tired of every moonbat and his/her brother trying to beat us over the head with our own constitution.

Examples you say?

Well we have the Canadian Federation of Students trying to get students who take student loans declared a protected social category so they could declare bankruptcy shortly after getting out of school and not have to pay back student loans. Yes, I am for good low cost education, but I am not for creation of a system that lets students get out of debt free. It took me 10 years to pay back my student loans but I did it. I didn’t pay back a whole lot the first few years because I didn’t make a lot of money, but as I got decent raises from working hard, I managed to increase my payments. Knowing I had that debt drove me to work harder too. (Thankfully the CFS is sitting with a loss in the Provincial court on this matter. I do not know if they plan to appeal to the SCC yet.)

Or we can take a look at a challenge made by the homeless over a decade ago which states:

“A person’s constitutional right to shelter takes precedence over any property rights of the owner of an unused apartment building.”

Yeah, that sounds fair. I have a building I am trying to rent but until I do, the homeless are allowed to squat in it. I can just imagine what showing the building would be like to prospective buyers/renters.

Then we have a BC union challenging the right of a city to use contract labour which they consider breaking of a contract with the employees union. Hey, if contract labour can do the job cheaper, then tough noogies on the union.

But how often do you hear about cases that are not about students, homeless, unions, etc.? How often does a charter challenge actually affect us all? It is this question that we should ask ourselves. And when we feel like we want to find good charter challenges to get behind, we will start looking more and more at agencies like the right leaning Canadian Constitution Foundation which is funding an Alberta charter challenge that is similar to the Chaoulli case in Quebec.

From the Frasier Institute:

Bill Murray, a chartered accountant in Calgary, has launched a charter lawsuit against Alberta’s health-care laws, which are almost identical to the Quebec law struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada in Chaoulli. Mr. Murray was prevented by his government from both accessing specialist recommended surgery on his hip and from spending his own money on comprehensive health insurance. The Chaoulli case could set an important precedent in the debate over access to health care in Canada – should Canadians be able to buy medical insurance for their children or themselves as they can for their pets? What is the fallout from private citizens challenging their right to private medical insurance in the courts?

If you want to support challenges that are good for everyone and not just the special interest groups, the Canadian Constitution Foundation can use your help. Go check them out. I truly believe that if a charter challenge is strong enough and if enough people back it, they will find the money somehow. That’s why I am glad we are not going to pay for the Little Sister’s in their challenge. And it also explains why I am going to be supporting the CCF moving forward.

p.s. Ezra Levant sits on their board.

H/T to my friend Sandy for info on the CCF.