Canada: Supreme Court to rule on expat voting rights - PressFrom - Canada
  •   
  •   
  •   

CanadaSupreme Court to rule on expat voting rights

09:05  11 january  2019
09:05  11 january  2019 Source:   msn.com

Court documents reveal peace bond hearing for couple accused in Victoria legislature bomb plot cancelled

Court documents reveal peace bond hearing for couple accused in Victoria legislature bomb plot cancelled Court documents reveal peace bond hearing for couple accused in Victoria legislature bomb plot cancelled

The Supreme Court split along ideological lines with its ruling that Congress had not provided adequate justification for subjecting the states WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday effectively struck down the heart of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by a 5-to-4 vote , freeing nine

British expats have lost their battle for the right to vote in the EU referendum. The Supreme Court upheld the decision of both the High Court and Jacquelyn MacLennan is battling along with fellow expat Harry Shindler the legality of the rule which excludes expats from voting if they have been

Supreme Court to rule on expat voting rights © THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick File image of the Supreme Court of Canada in Ottawa.

TORONTO - Long-term Canadian expats are set to find out on Friday whether a now-repealed 25-year-old law barring them from voting in federal elections was constitutional.

The pending decision by the Supreme Court of Canada should settle a legal battle begun in earnest during the former Conservative government of then-prime minister Stephen Harper, and which gained prominence in the election that brought the Liberals under Justin Trudeau to office.

Observers said they would be watching to see whether the country's top court might justify limits on a constitutionally guaranteed right that potentially affects more than one-million Canadians who live abroad.

Challenge to medically assisted dying laws begins in Quebec court

Challenge to medically assisted dying laws begins in Quebec court The judge's decision at the end of the hearing could alter how the laws are applied in the province and across the country.

Although Senate rules do not necessarily allow a negative vote in committee to block a nomination, prior to Not every Supreme Court nominee has received a floor vote in the Senate. Therefore, the current court sits as follows from left to right , from the perspective of those facing the Court : Gorsuch

The supreme court will deliver its eagerly awaited judgment next Tuesday on whether ministers or parliament have the legal authority to trigger Brexit. Its chairman, John Shaw, said: “Fair Deal for Expats eagerly awaits the judgment of the supreme court . [Our] members have been involved in this

"What makes this case so interesting is that the Constitution sets no limits on citizen's voting rights, so does that mean legislatures get to impose one?" Toronto-based lawyer Andrew Bernstein said on Thursday. "Do the reasons why someone has moved make a difference? How strict will the court be when the government seeks to justify an infringement?"

While the Constitution guarantees all Canadian citizens the right to vote, Canadians who have lived abroad for five years or more lost that right under provisions of the Canada Elections Act enacted in 1993. However, it was only under Harper that Elections Canada began enforcing the provisions more strictly, prompting the court battle.

Two long-time expats living and working in the United States launched the charter challenge after they were denied the right to vote in the 2011 federal election.

Ottawa gets more time to fix solitary confinement

Ottawa gets more time to fix solitary confinement The British Columbia Court of Appeal has given the federal government more time to fix its solitary confinement law after a lower court declared the law unconstitutional last year. The B.C. Supreme Court ruling last January gave Ottawa a year to enact replacement legislation, and the Appeal Court has now extended the deadline to June 17, with conditions to protect prisoners' constitutional rights in the meantime.

Voting rights advocates had been watching the North Carolina case for signs of how a closely divided Supreme Court would rule on similar lawsuits now that Justice Gorsuch is on the court . In September, a deadlocked Supreme Court turned down an emergency pre-election request from state officials to

A hearing is underway at the Supreme Court of Canada to decide whether long-term expats should be allowed to vote in Canadian elections. In a split decision in 2015, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled the voting restrictions do infringe on the rights of citizens, but that it was democratically justified

Essentially, Jamie Duong, of Ithaca, N.Y., and Gill Frank, 40, an academic living in Richmond, Va., argued nothing warranted the abridgment of their constitutional right to vote. They insisted they maintain deep ties to Canada, and taxes and other laws passed by Parliament could still affect them.

In 2015, the campaigning Liberals promised a review and the Trudeau government, which faces an election campaign in October, introduced legislation in November 2016 to extend the franchise to all Canadians abroad. While that legislation never proceeded, the government did pass electoral reform legislation last month that did away with the five-year provision.

The issue, Frank has said, is that voting rights should not be "subject to the political whims of Parliament."

The case, which garnered attention from civil liberties groups, initially went in favour of Duong and Frank when an Ontario Superior Court justice sided with them in 2014. However, the federal government appealed and in a split decision in 2015, the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned the earlier ruling, paving the way for the current Supreme Court tussle.

NewsAlert: SCOC rules restrictions on expat voting unconstitutional

NewsAlert: SCOC rules restrictions on expat voting unconstitutional The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled a law that had restricted voting rights for long-term expats for the last 25 years was unconstitutional. In a ruling today, the country's top court said the restriction could not be justified. 

The Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act on Tuesday, the provision of the landmark civil rights law that designates which parts o The court did not rule on Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the preclearance requirement itself, which requires those affected states to have

Supreme Court 's Voting Rights Act Decision. View Full Document ». The justices ruled that Section 4 is unconstitutional, and that the formula used for decades — revised and extended several times by Congress — can no longer be used to establish those "preclearance" requirements: "The

While the Appeal Court agreed the law infringed on the rights of citizens, the majority found the infringement was justified in a democracy because the rules preserve the "social contract" between voters and lawmakers.

In arguments before the Supreme Court, the government noted almost all Canadians living abroad were barred from voting before the 1993 law changes. Ottawa also argued the five-year rule was a policy decision that aimed to maintain the fairness of the democratic system given that long-term non-residents have "different and less onerous responsibilities" under Canadian law.

The expats responded by calling the five-year threshold an arbitrary marker that did not take into account their ongoing connection to Canada.

In the 2015 election, celebrities such as Donald Sutherland, Canadian business groups abroad and other expats rallied against Harper and the expat voting ban.

Note to readers: This is a corrected story. An earlier version did not mention that the law was repealed and replaced by the Liberals last month.

Former Mountie pleads guilty to two counts.
VANCOUVER - A lead investigator in a gang-related mass murder in British Columbia has been handed a conditional sentence to be served in the community after he pleaded guilty to breach of trust and obstruction of justice. Derek Brassington was sentenced to two years less a day and ordered to pay $10,000 in restitution in B.C. Supreme Court on Friday, eliminating the need for a 10-week trial. The indictment says Brassington breached the standard demanded of him in managing a witness and obstructed justice by compromising the integrity and safety of a witness.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks

Topical videos:

usr: 0
This is interesting!