IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/publus/v35y2005i2p217-243.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Shaping the Constitutional Dialogue on Federalism: Canada's Supreme Court as Meta-Political Actor

Author

Listed:
  • James B. Kelly
  • Michael Murphy

Abstract

This article challenges the view that the Supreme Court has become the predominant authority on the constitutional distribution of rights and entitlements among governments in the Canadian federation. By assuming this position of supremacy, critics continue, the Court has usurped key policy functions that belong to political actors, a move that has undermined democratic governance in Canada. Against this view, we argue that the management of Canada's federal constitutional architecture is a responsibility the courts share with key political actors. We describe the Court's role as meta-political, whereby the Court's federalism jurisprudence supplements rather than subverts the constitutional role of political actors. We develop our thesis in relation to two subnational constituencies with a distinctive constitutional status in Canada: the province of Quebec and Aboriginal First Nations. Copyright 2005, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • James B. Kelly & Michael Murphy, 2005. "Shaping the Constitutional Dialogue on Federalism: Canada's Supreme Court as Meta-Political Actor," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 35(2), pages 217-243, Spring.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:35:y:2005:i:2:p:217-243
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/publius/pji010
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:35:y:2005:i:2:p:217-243. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/publius .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.