Return to search

Determining the Constitutionality of the National Securities Regulator Proposal and Beyond: The Federal Trade and Commerce Power, the General Motors test and the Choice Between ‘Categorization’ and ‘Balancing’

In addition to demonstrating the judiciary’s role in constitutional adjudication and an application of the federal trade and commerce power, judicial determination of Parliament’s constitutional jurisdiction to enact securities legislation is noteworthy also due to the vast policy debates that are involved. Though such determinations routinely invite a process removed from the contemplation of desirable policy, the ‘General Motors test’ used to define and apply the relevant constitutional power here seems to implicitly allow it. The choice between ‘categorization’ and ‘balancing’ in constitutional analysis is therefore significant, in terms of its juxtaposed tolerance for policy considerations. With these analytical options in mind, this thesis considers Parliament’s proposal, so to identify a reasonable process for determining its constitutionality. It argues that balancing relevant policy concerns is necessary and justifiable in the application of the legal norms in question. Crucial, however, is lending the process structure, so that its shortcomings are mitigated.

Identiferoai:union.ndltd.org:TORONTO/oai:tspace.library.utoronto.ca:1807/31633
Date04 January 2012
CreatorsWiner, Oren S.
ContributorsLee, Ian B.
Source SetsUniversity of Toronto
Languageen_ca
Detected LanguageEnglish
TypeThesis

Page generated in 0.0022 seconds