Episodes

R v. Latimer

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in 2001 that Robert Latimer’s murder of his severely disabled daughter was not a mercy killing. But in the 25 years since R v. Latimer, another landmark Supreme Court decision re-shaped how Canadians think about people with disabilities and the right to die: the legalization of medical assistance in dying. In this episode, we dive into how debates around disability rights, mercy killings and end-of-life rights have changed in the last quarter century. 

United States v. Burns

What unfolded in Canada’s top court when two Canadian citizens were accused of a brutal murder in Washington State? The Supreme Court justices had to decide in 2001 whether the the federal government could extradite Canadians to countries where they faced the death penalty. United States v. Burns examined murky questions, including the ethics of killing a potentially innocent human being. In this episode, we look at the ground-breaking decision, known as Burns and Rafay.  

Dunmore v. Ontario

The Supreme Court of Canada confronted one of its most groundbreaking labour relations cases 25 years ago, when it ruled that migrant farm workers in Ontario had the right to collective bargaining. The legacy of Dunmore v. Ontario lives on in debates over labour rights, exclusion, and freedom of association. In this episode, we dive into a retrospective of Dunmore and its impact for migrant workers and the broader labour movement.  

Trinity Western University v. British Columbia College of Teachers

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed Trinity Western University to open an education program in 2001, only to shut down its law school in 2018. Queer students at the Christian university have been at the centre of the two legal challenges that reached the high court, in a showdown between religious freedom and discrimination in education. In this episode, we talk to LGBTQ+ former students and legal expert Richard Moon about the enduring impact.  

Van de Pierre v. Edwards

The Supreme Court of Canada was asked in 2001 to decide how important the race of a child is in custody cases. The bench ruled that it’s just one of many factors to be considered when weighing a child’s best interests. But what does that mean in a society where mixed-race households are increasingly common? And how has the decision impacted modern cases? In this episode, we look at the leading case of Van de Perre v. Edwards and speak to lawyers about what the Supreme Court did – and didn’t – say. 

R v. Sharpe

In the landmark decision of R v. Sharpe, the Supreme Court of Canada created exceptions for the possession of child sexual abuse material, ruling that self-created, written material held solely by the creator is not criminal. In this episode, we discuss how the court’s exemptions are complicated in the new world of artificial intelligence.