We're pleased to welcome Justice Colin C.J. Feasby from the Alberta Court of King's Bench for a lecture on democratic theory.

This hybrid event will be held on February 3rd at 12:00PM-1:00PM MST in room 113 of the Law Centre and online via Zoom.

To register for in-person attendance, please click the red button on the right-hand side of the page, or follow this link: Political Theory and Canada’s Law of Democracy | February 3 @ 12:00-1:00 PM MST | Eventbrite

To register for online attendance, please follow this link: Political Theory and Canada’s Law of Democracy | February 3 @ 12:00-1:00 PM MST | Zoom

Abstract: Legal academics and political scientists question whether courts faced with democracy issues should be guided by political theory. Justice Feasby will argue that the text and structure of the constitution force judges to confront different aspects of political theory. The real question, according to Justice Feasby, is what kind of theory (or theories) judges should adopt. He will argue that an underlying theory of the state and three different democratic theories can be discerned from the Supreme Court of Canada’s democracy jurisprudence. These theories, sometimes in tension with one another, are manifested in different types of cases and different aspects of constitutional analysis. Justice Feasby explains that there is a coherent theoretical foundation for Canada’s law of democracy that provides useful guidance for judges confronted with democracy issues.

We're pleased to welcome Scott Fairley (Cambridge LLP) for a lecture on his newly released book, Foreign Affairs in the Canadian Constitution.

This hybrid event will be held on January 29 at 12:00PM MST in room 113 of the Law Centre and online via Zoom.

To register for in-person attendance, please click the red button on the right-hand side of the page, or follow this link: Foreign Affairs in the Canadian Constitution | January 29 @ 12:00-1:00 PM MST | Eventbrite

To register for online attendance, please follow this link: Foreign Affairs in the Canadian Constitution | January 29 @ 12:00-1:00 PM MST | Zoom 

Abstract: This book challenges siloed understandings of treaty-making (federal) and treaty implementation (federal or provincial depending on subject matter, regardless of the international context) with a view to bringing them together under a single subject, as its title suggests. However, it does so, mindful that Canada remains a diverse federal state spread over a vast territory. My account does not seek to drive a cart and a horse through constitutionally allocated provincial powers. What I do say, however, is that the "international" makes the "local" of national interest and importance for purposes of federal competence to act comprehensively for that purpose, both at the executive level and through Parliament as a key part of federal residual powers for the Peace, Order and Good Government of the Nation (or POGG for short). Federal trade and commerce cases have also been very helpful in conveying a similarly principled message. There are chapters on both. In this, I am perhaps a little ahead of the Supreme Court of Canada on point, but that court is not far behind. We might even go so far as to say that our current government is leading with its chin in this area in seeking new allies to augment or replace our now mercurial neighbor to the south and trying to pull off grand projects in the national interest, in part, to nurture those relationships.

We're excited to host a special screening of Democracy on Trial: The Morgentaler Affair, a NFB documentary that tracks the efforts of Doctor Henry Morgentaler to challenge Canada's abortion laws in the 1970s. The screening will be followed by a panel discussion featuring Patricia Paradis, Marie Gordon, and Elizabeth McCord.

This is a free event open to all members of the public. It will take place at the Garneau Theatre (8712 109th Street). Doors open at 5:30pm.

To register for the event, please click the red button on the right side of the page, or follow this link: "Democracy on Trial: The Morgentaler Affair" Screening & Panel Discussion | 27 January 2026 @ 6:00PM

Film Details:

Director: Paul Cowan
Rating: PG
Genre: Documentary
Run Time: 58 minutes

Paul Cowan's film captures the spirit of the legal battle over abortion waged by Dr. Henry Morgentaler in Quebec and in federal courts between 1970 and 1976. Using a combination of newsreel footage, interviews and re-enactments, this docudrama unravels the complexities of the case that began as a challenge to Canada's abortion laws and turned into a precedent-setting civil rights case.

This film is provided courtesy of the National Film Board of Canada.

The Centre for Constitutional Studies is thrilled to be hosting a book launch for our newly released special double issue of the Review of Constitutional Studies (RCS 29:2 and 29:3). This special issue, which is titled "Our More Than Human Constitutions," was guest edited by Professors Jessica Eisen (University of Alberta) and Lindsay Borrows (Queen's University). It comprises contributions from scholars in an array of academic fields -- including Indigenous law, environmental law, and animal law -- on the ways in which our legal orders, Indigenous and state, approach the regulation of the more-than-human.

Our launch event for this special issue will feature Professors Eisen and Borrows, alongside several of the issue's contributors: Hannah Askew (Sierra Club BC), Professor Darcy Lindberg (University of Victoria), Professor Pamala Spalding (University of Victoria), and Professor Stepan Wood (University of British Columbia).

We're pleased to welcome Professor Margot Young from the University of British Columbia's Peter A. Allard School of Law to discuss the 2024 SCC Dickson v Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation decision.

This hybrid event will be held on November 17 at 12:00PM in room 231 of the Law Centre and online via zoom.

Lecture Abstract:

There are several important narratives to be pulled from the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Dickson v Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation. The decision is long and complex, spanning three separate judgments. This lecture looks at a few particular aspects: the assessment across each judgment of the applicability of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to the Vuntut Gwitchin government and the elaborations of the import of section 25 of the Charter that follow findings that the Charter applies. The lecture's argument teases out the centrality assigned to liberal understandings of constitutional relations, of government, and of the rights the Charter protects. Caution issues about judicial resort to the notion of "Indigenous difference" as reference point for the scope of section 25. The lecture concludes that a majority of the judges sidestep engagement with the critical recasting of constitutional relations and justice that decolonization demands.

The Centre is pleased to host a lecture by Caleb Behn, Lands Manager with West Moberly First Nation. Caleb will be delivering a lecture titled "Killing Law Quietly: The Battles over UNDRIP Implementation."

This event will be held in-person on Thursday, October 16 in the Law Centre (Room 231/237) from 12:00PM-1:00PM.

The Centre is excited to announce that we'll be hosting a launch event for Challenging Exile: Japanese Canadians and the Wartime Constitution by Professors Eric Adams (University of Alberta, Faculty of Law) and Jordan Stanger-Ross (University of Victoria, History Department). Join us for food, drinks, and a short talk by co-author Professor Adams, as well as comments on the book by Jessica Eisen (U of A, Law), Dominique Clement (U of A, Sociology), and Aya Fujiwara (U of A, History). It will take place at 5:30pm on October 21st, in the City Room (5th floor) of Peter Lougheed Hall (University of Alberta).

This event is co-sponsored by the University of Alberta Faculty of Law and the Prince Takamado Japan Centre for Teaching and Research.

Book Abstract:

In September 1945, Canada proposed exiling Japanese Canadians to Japan, a country devastated by war. Thousands who had experienced internment and dispossession were now at risk of banishment.

In Challenging Exile, Eric M. Adams and Jordan Stanger-Ross detail the circumstances and personalities behind the exile. They follow the lives of families facing government orders that uprooted them from their homes, stripped them of their livelihoods and possessions, and proposed to exile them from Canada. And they analyze the court case in which lawyers and judges grappled with the meaning of citizenship, race, and rights in times of war and its aftermath.

Unfolding in a context of global conflict, sharpened borders, and racist suspicion, the story told in Challenging Exile has enduring relevance for our own troubled times.

The Centre is excited to host a Zoom lecture by Andrew Stobo Sniderman, an SJD candidate at Harvard Law School and co-author of the acclaimed book, Valley of the Birdtail: An Indian Reserve, a White Town, and the Road to Reconciliation (along with Professor Douglas Sanderson).

Lecture Abstract

Canada’s belated legal reckoning with unequal public services on Indian reserves is only beginning. This article proceeds in two main parts. First, I address a puzzle: even though the problem of deficient services on reserves endured for decades – and, in many respects, endures still – Canadian courts have hardly addressed its constitutionality. This constitutional silence can appear surprising, even astonishing. Second, I suggest that the curiously neglected section 36 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which calls for "reasonably comparable services" and "essential public services of reasonable quality to all Canadians," should inform the constitutional conversation about unequal services on reserves. The exclusion of reserves from equalization, a principle enshrined in section 36, is a largely-overlooked legal omission that has enabled the problem to fester. Conceiving of section 36's components as "directive principles" – neither enforceable fundamental rights nor empty political aspirations – helps unlock new possibilities for judicial and political use, particularly in light of the treatment of directive principles in other countries. The language of section 36 has never been explicitly used by a Canadian judge as an interpretive aid. But this should change.

We're pleased to welcome Professor Michael Pal from the University of Ottawa Faculty of Law to discuss the right to vote under section 3 of the Charter.

This event will be held at 12:00PM in room 101 of the Law Centre.

Lecture Abstract:

The right to vote guaranteed by section 3 of the Charter is in a period of rapid evolution, after the Supreme Court of Canada’s decisions in Frank, City of Toronto, and Working Families. This lecture argues that the history of section 3, the text of the Charter, and the contemporary case law suggest that the answers to three questions will define the ‘new right to vote.’ First, what is the proper relationship of section 3 to other democratic rights and freedoms? Second, what are the implications of the more frequent use of the notwithstanding clause for section 3? Third, is there a ‘positive’ dimension of the right to vote? The lecture argues that the scope of the new right to vote will be closely tied to the answers to these questions. It sets out responses to each in light of Canada’s democratic tradition and the reality of global challenges to democracy.