Friends Who Argue

In Part 2 of this interview, released in honour of Black History Month, Natalia Rodriguez and Joshua Sealy-Harrington continue their important discussion on systemic racism looking at examples in recent jurisprudence, including;

• R. v. Kokopenace, 2015 SCC 28, in which the Court declined to consider the disproportionate effects of the jury roll system on racialized and marginalized Canadians
• Fraser v. Canada, a recent Supreme Court of Canada decision that provides some helpful language in addressing systemic barriers
• R. v. Chouhan, a Supreme Court of Canada decision on pre-emptory challenges
• They also discuss why there is so little s. 15 jurisprudence relating to race at the highest levels of our courts

Natalia Rodriguez https://conway.pro/natalia-rodriguez

Joshua Sealy-Harrington https://powerlaw.ca/teams/joshua-sealy-harrington/

In Part 1 of this two-part interview, released in honour of Black History Month,  please join Natalia Rodriguez for an engaging and meaningful conversation with Joshua Sealy-Harrington, author, academic and advocate, about Critical Race Theory and systemic racism viewed through the lens of historical jurisprudence. They also discuss racism in policing, the criminal justice system, and the free market, and why the absence of “race-talk” in the case law has the effect of maintaining racial barriers.

Natalia Rodriguez https://conway.pro/natalia-rodriguez

Joshua Sealy-Harrington https://powerlaw.ca/teams/joshua-sealy-harrington/

In this episode, we talk to TAS award recipient Omar Ha-Redeye about civility in the legal profession, his ever-evolving career in law, teaching at Ryerson during the pandemic, his advice to junior lawyers, and that time he ruptured an eardrum… 

Join Cynthia Spry of Babin Bessner Spry LLP, as she interviews Kate Robertson of Markson Law, and Michael Bookman, also of Babin Bessner Spry LLP, regarding the recent decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in the Reference re: the Genetic Non-Discrimination Act, 2020 SCC 17.

In the Reference, the Court split two ways in three sets of reasons on the question of whether Parliament had validly exercised its criminal law power in enacting prohibitions on the taking and disclosure of genetic tests as a condition of obtaining access to goods, services and contracts.

Mr. Bookman and Ms. Robertson offer their insight into the decision - Mr. Bookman who acted as counsel to an intervenor in the Reference at the Supreme Court of Canada, and Ms. Robertson who consults on constitutional law matters relating to human rights and technology as a Fellow at The Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto.

Welcome to Friends Who Argue! In our first episode, Laura Gurr of Cohen Highly LLP in London sits down with  Erin Durant of Borden Ladner Gervais LLP in Ottawa about the early days of her career, her mentors and what impact she sees COVID-19 has had on access to justice.