Asher Honickman
@Honickman
Followers
4K
Following
2K
Media
7
Statuses
172
Founding Partner of Jordan Honickman Barristers, practicing civil and public litigation. President of @arlcanada. Tweeting on various nerdy stuff.
Toronto, Ontario
Joined March 2010
Any serious assessment of this war easily dispels the genocide charge, both as a matter of fact and law. Cdn politicians who repeat this libel are, at best, the unwitting disseminators of Hamas's narrative, and are treating their own Jewish constituents with reckless disregard.
My letter to Minister Anand re Israel’s genocide in Gaza .
12
47
237
RT @DwightNewmanLaw: Interesting comment by a distinguished lawyer and former treaty negotiator and deputy minister on things the BC and fe….
vancouversun.com
0
20
0
TFW a designated terrorist group sues you for copyright infringement.
The Toronto International Film has cancelled a screening of a documentary about the Oct 7 attacks because some of the footage had not been cleared for use by Hamas.
3
7
13
RT @Sean_Speer: These positions are completely reconcilable—and I’d argue consistent. The Nova Scotia blanket forest ban is more than a me….
0
39
0
My own view remains that the text is the object of interpretation because it expresses legislative intent, but that it must be interpreted in its complete historical, philosophical and statutory context. You can call that "textualism" or call it something else.
My own sense is that rather than beating the "textualism" drum, a proper interpretation of s. 33 will have to be grounded not only in text but its underlying reason and place in the constitutional order—a point prominent in both the decision in Hak and in Caldwell J.A.'s dissent.
0
0
2
This is true - but it is not the purview of the judiciary to educate Canadians. Save for reference questions, the judicial function is to decide cases, and legal declarations are made incidental to that core function. Where there is no live case, there can be no declaration.
0
0
4
Professor @MaxSaintH and @xavierfm3 had it right 5 years ago when they wrote that in the face of a s.33 invocation there is "nothing to declare".
ruleoflaw.ca
The following is the first in a two-part series. Part II will be published next week. Introduction In the wake of the legal challenge to Quebec’s law on state secularism,[1]...
The Sask. Court of Appeal has now held 4-1 that courts can review and declare laws validly invoking the s33 notwithstanding clause to violate rights, without rendering the law inoperative. This contradicts the Quebec Court of Appeal in Hak. This is yet more judicial overreach.
1
8
17
RT @cvangeyn: The decision in the ONCA appeal of a legal challenge to the first-past-the-post voting system is out. The @CDNConstFound was….
0
11
0
In other words, s.7 doesn't provide a general right to "life, liberty and security of the person" in all contexts. It protects the individual from the state depriving an individual of those rights in the specific context of the administration of justice.
0
0
1
Section 7 comes under the heading "Legal Rights". It was originally intended to apply only to "procedural" rights - meaning the right to a fair hearing. Even going beyond this meaning, however, it should be confined to the administration of justice.
1
0
0
RT @DwightNewmanLaw: The extremely wide reading of section 7 of the Canadian Charter has all kinds of warping effects on constitutional law….
0
10
0
RT @Sean_Speer: Ontario’s bike lanes brouhaha reveals the absurdity of Canada’s judiciary. This week’s Ontario court decision declaring the….
0
36
0
In the wake of the Cycle Toronto decision, I'm re-upping my paper from 2016 (also published in Law Matters), in which I argued for a narrower interpretation of s.7 in accordance with its text, context and purpose.
1
3
13
But, in fact, it does. If there is a right not to have one or more bike lanes removed, then there is ipso facto some right to bike lanes. Whether that right extends to new bike lanes or only to existing ones speaks to the scope of the right, but not to its existence.
The decision explicitly states that it does not create “a right to bike lanes.”.
2
3
23
RT @MichaelPlaxton: It is very kind of you to post a chunk of your book - which I have just ordered and look forward to reading in full. I….
0
11
0
Exactly. Everyone should have various polices they believe are "stupid but constitutional." As a Toronto cyclist, I support bike lanes and oppose the law; but the law does not violate my constitutional rights.
This is the problem with so much Canadian political commentary in the charter era. One may agree or disagree with the Ford government’s bike lane policy. But that’s a political matter. It isn’t a constitutional one. The tendency to constitutionalize political disagreements.
0
4
15
Since 10/7, @havivrettiggur has emerged as perhaps the most insightful, fair and eloquent commentator on Israel's war with Iran and its proxies. His podcast is a must-listen and this article is a must-read.
"Hamas’s fundamental plan for survival is Gaza’s humanitarian suffering. It’s the catalyst for international pressure on Israel. And it’s working.". Must-read by @havivrettiggur in @TheFP:. Israel’s Winning One War While It Loses Another.
0
3
7
Many falsely believed, for example, that American annexation was an actual threat.
Many voters cast ballot in last federal election without being fully informed: poll
81
51
418