A Legal Forum for Intellectual Diversity

This episode of Runnymede Radio is the second half of a two-part series on the Borderland Pride v. Township of Emo case before the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal. In 2024, the Tribunal ordered Emo Township and Mayor Harold McQuaker to pay damages after the Township refused requests to proclaim Pride Month and display a Pride flag. Part II features an original interview with Josh Dehaas, Interim Litigation Director at the Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) and counsel for the CCF in

This episode of Runnymede Radio is the first half of a two-part series on the Borderland Pride v. Township of Emo case before the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal. Part I features an original interview with Doug Judson, lawyer and applicant in the proceedings against Emo Township and Mayor Harold McQuaker, following the Tribunal’s 2024 decision ordering damages after the Township refused requests to proclaim Pride Month and display a Pride flag. Judson discusses the background to the dispute, the Tribunal’s

In this episode of Runnymede Radio, we feature an original interview with Professor Philippe Lagassé (Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University). Lagassé discusses his recent writing on the possible existence of a Crown prerogative to “keep the peace” within Canada, and what this would mean for the constitutional foundations of executive power. Using the Emergencies Act and the 2022 Public Order Emergency as context, he considers whether statutory frameworks fully define the scope of emergency authority. The conversation

In this episode of Runnymede Radio, we share a live recording from a bilingual event hosted by the Runnymede Society’s McGill University Chapter, featuring Professor Maxime St-Hilaire (Université de Sherbrooke) and Professor Victor Muñiz-Fraticelli (McGill University). The panel examines the enduring debate between legal positivism and natural law theory, focusing on whether law can be understood as a system grounded in social facts or whether its legitimacy depends on a connection to moral reasoning and the common good. Drawing on

In this episode of Runnymede Radio, we feature a recording from a Western University Chapter panel with Professor Dwight Newman (University of Saskatchewan) and Professor Michael Coyle (Western University). Following a previous episode examining the drafting and interpretation of Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, this conversation explores how contemporary jurisprudence is shaping the scope and application of Aboriginal and treaty rights. The panel, titled “Will Reconciliation Require the Transfer of Private Land? A Discussion of Recent Jurisprudence and

In this episode of Runnymede Radio, we feature an original interview with Michael Scott (PrimaryDocuments.ca). Scott discusses his ongoing research on the drafting history of Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982—which recognizes and affirms existing Aboriginal and treaty rights—drawing on archival materials and his work with PrimaryDocuments.ca, a database of historical documents relating to the creation of Canada’s Constitution. The conversation explores the historical context of Section 35, the interpretive challenges posed by its ambiguity, and what the drafting