In this episode, Léonid Sirota, Senior Lecturer at the Auckland University of Technology Law School, discusses his work on Canadian constitutional law. He begins by describing the sources of Canadian constitutional law, when they were adopted, and which institutions have interpreted them. He explains that the prevailing view of Canadian constitutional law rejects originalist methods of interpretation in favor of a form of living constitutionalism. But he observes that this position is overstates, as the Canadian Supreme Court actually engages in a form of originalist interpretation on a regular basis. He argues that the Court should acknowledge its use of originalist methodologies and that they may promote the rule of law. Sirota is on Twitter at @DoubleAspect and blogs at doubleaspect.blog.

The articles addressed in this interview include:

• Benjamin Oliphant & Léonid Sirota, Has the Supreme Court of Canada Rejected "Originalism"?, 42 Queen’s Law Journal 107 (2016).
• Léonid Sirota & Benjamin Oliphant, Originalist Reasoning in Canadian Constitutional Jurisprudence, 50 UBC Law Review 505 (2017).
• Léonid Sirota, More v. Roper: A Comment on Lawrence Solum’s Defence of Originalism, Comparative Perspectives on Originalism (2017).

This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Associate Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.