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.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:TORONTO/oai:tspace.library.utoronto.ca:1807/31633 |
| Date | 04 January 2012 |
| Creators | Winer, Oren S. |
| Contributors | Lee, Ian B. |
| Source Sets | University of Toronto |
| Language | en_ca |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds