Ready, Aim, Backfire!

Earlier in the week, a gaggle of outraged “conservative Christians” signed the letter of complaint to the Canadian Judicial Council, the body responsible for overseeing the conduct of federally appointed judges, demanding that Supreme Court Justice Beverley McLachlin be removed from her post for her role in awarding the Order of Canada to Dr. Henry Morgentaler.

One slight problem. Justice McLachlin purposely didn’t cast a vote at the committee meeting where his name was proposed as a recipient. In fact, McLaclin’s policy isn’t to vote at all for or against a particular name if she can possibly avoid doing so. She’s reputed to have once done so to break a tie, but doesn’t have any recollection of it.

One wonders why these over-zealous buffoons didn’t check to verify this before launching their effort to impeach the Chief Justice, rather than simply assuming what they believed to be true. Oops. I think I just answered my own question.

22 Replies to “Ready, Aim, Backfire!”

  1. RT,

    Impeach her anyway!

    I’ve got the pitch forks, if you’ve got the torches, now we just need matches.

    Ti-Guy should have those.

    By the way, you’ve left out the most important part; If not Bev than who? Whose great idea was it to move, second and vote for Morgentaler’s entry into the Order of Canada?

  2. Whose great idea was it to move, second and vote for Morgentaler’s entry into the Order of Canada?

    Conrad Black’s.

    Fuck Conservatives up their cornholes.

  3. PSA — Thanks, although I’m sure that it can’t possibly be original.

    Tomm — Any particular reason, or is an anti-judicial stance just your default position after so many years of Liberal appointments? (She was put on the bench by Mulroney, by the way.)

  4. It’s something isn’t it? I was going to write about it too, but I confess I was just too livid.

    Consider the amount of ink spilled when this story first broke and the girth that the Con’s were afforded.

    Man, it’s tough to be honourable in this country these days and that is not good news for anyone.

  5. RT,

    You said:

    “…Tomm — Any particular reason, or is an anti-judicial stance just your default position after so many years of Liberal appointments?”

    Nah, just because I hate to be wrong, and I was sure she was a villian in this piece.

  6. Ti-Guy,

    Conrad Black?

    I thought he was in jail.

    He sure has a long reach. You got the matches? I’m still game.

  7. I’m surprised she even bothered to comment, its not like her. (a little sensitive she is methinks)

    Also, if she has the role of breaking a tie, she should not have even been in the room for this vote. Why didn’t she recuse herself like she did when the vote occurred on Ahenakew’s revocation. Since she remained, how would she have voted?

    And another thing, she claims that there have been tied votes before. Bullshit. This was the first OofC that had not received unanimity.

  8. Also, if she has the role of breaking a tie, she should not have even been in the room for this vote.

    By statute, the chief justice is the of the advisory council for the Order of Canada.

    And another thing, she claims that there have been tied votes before. Bullshit. This was the first OofC that had not received unanimity.

    How do you know this?

    Fuck, I hate Conservatives.

  9. “Are they all conspiracy nuts? It sure seems that way sometimes.”

    Could be the Canadian Ron Paulestinians coming out of the woodwork again. I’ve seen them pop up here and there.

  10. I smell a lot of blood in the water: “Top judge didn’t vote in Morgentaler decision”

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080816.wmclachlin0816/BNStory/National/home

    ===Top judge didn’t vote in Morgentaler decision===

    You have read that article in order to realise the madness of it all: in response to “an anonymous complaint” to the Canadian Judicial Council about her conduct Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin claims that she didn’t vote in Morgentaler decision.

    In the eyes of Globe and Mail editors complaint presented by 42 organisations representing over a million people constitute “an anonymous complaint”.

    Actual vote by Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin is mentioned only in point seven of the complaint. Other issues relate to her decisions as a Chair of Nominating Committee of the Order of Canada. Is she going to deny her decisions as a Chair?? She already claims that she was forced to preside over that fiasco.

    Best part of latest pronouncements was offered by Chief Justice Scott, Beverly’s lap dog and a head of Disciplinary Committee of Canadian Judicial Council who said, “The bottom line is, if it’s not about misconduct, the complaint is going to be dismissed without asking the judge involved to comment.”

    This magic distinction that CJC keep on making between “judicial decisions” and “judicial conduct” is about to crush and burn while hitting reality of this complaint.

    This “ultimate excuse” that CJC keeps on using in order to refuse looking at stupid judicial decisions that Canadians keep on complaining about is that such “judicial decisions” could and should be appealed to a court of higher jurisdiction regardless of time lost and cost of such “remedies”.

    This excuse of so called “ultimate remedy” is not going to work in this particular case.

    Since we are taking about Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin’s decisions as a Chair of Order of Canada Nominating Committee, the only appeal that anybody could ever make, as there is no higher court in this land, would ultimately send it back to the Supreme Court of Canada where Beverly McLachlin is acting as a Chief Justice. That being the case it is not possible to have her decisions however stupid they appear to have been overturned by anybody else but herself.

    If we are talking about checks and balances in Canadian government, now matter how we slice it, Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin has to step down in order to have this; “anonymous complaint”, filed by 42 organisations acting on behalf of over million people living in Canada, properly resolved.

  11. Isn’t it standard practice (not to mention Robert’s Rules of Order) that the chair of a committee does not vote unless there is a tie at committee?

    On the few occasions I chaired committees (yacht club, retired sailors for the preservation of Banana slugs, etc.) I was not permitted to vote unless there was a tie… IAW Robert’s Rules.

    Surely these goofs don’t believe that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada exercises powers outside those rules… do they?

    Oh… now I get it. If they had their bum in that seat that’s exactly what they would expect.

  12. “This magic distinction that CJC keep on making between “judicial decisions” and “judicial conduct” is about to crush and burn while hitting reality of this complaint.’

    Your entire post is rather incoherent, but maybe I can help you.

    The law actually over-rules your “opinion”. If you do not like that, it is just too bad for you. If you do not like the decisions from the court there are two options: 1) change the law, and 2) amend the constitution in order to change the law. Parliament can do both (but they need teh help of the provinces to do #2).

    Stop blaming the courts if you are not happy – go to your elected representative and ask them to amend the constitution to compel courts to only make decisions that please you.

    Since that will not happen, I suggest you move to a country that has a dictatorship. That seems to be more up your alley.

  13. Gayle — These religious zealots and their theocratic folderol are hopeless ninnies. I’d bet that “Karol” person is just dumping that same comment all over the place. He/she/it will never respond. It’s little better than spam.

  14. In the eyes of Globe and Mail editors complaint presented by 42 organisations representing over a million people constitute “an anonymous complaint”.

    Did anyone actually put their name to a complaint? If those so-called million people forwarded complaints there might be something to look at. However, they’re all silent. And in order for them to be counted in a judicial complaint, they would have to provide their names and the cause of their complaint. So, in fact, 42 people have filed a like complaint – they represent no one. That they have not provided their names makes them SURPRIZE anonymous.

    This magic distinction that CJC keep on making between “judicial decisions” and “judicial conduct” is about to crush and burn while hitting reality of this complaint.

    This “ultimate excuse” that CJC keeps on using in order to refuse looking at stupid judicial decisions that Canadians keep on complaining about is that such “judicial decisions” could and should be appealed to a court of higher jurisdiction regardless of time lost and cost of such “remedies”.

    Umm no. The event of record was neither a judicial decision nor a matter of judicial conduct. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada automatically assumes the role of chairman of several committees. Since the role is outside the court and a secondary assigned duty it is not subject to judicial review. If you think the backfire was loud today wait until the CJC, after reviewing the minutes of OOC Nominating Committee Meetings determines that the CJSCC acted with complete propriety and in accordance with the rules of her appointment.

    Since we are taking about Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin’s decisions as a Chair of Order of Canada Nominating Committee, the only appeal that anybody could ever make, as there is no higher court in this land, would ultimately send it back to the Supreme Court of Canada where Beverly McLachlin is acting as a Chief Justice. That being the case it is not possible to have her decisions however stupid they appear to have been overturned by anybody else but herself.

    Utter tripe. Get a better grip on the actual structure and the conventions. The truth is, Chief Justice sends a nomination list which is a “recommendation”. Constitutionally, it is up to the Governor General to approve or disapprove of those nominations. The Supreme Court of Canada, aside from providing the appointed chair, has nothing to do with it and is not in a position to provide a “remedy” particularly since the question is based on the fact that someone has received an honour and award that a minority of people simply don’t like on religious grounds. There isn’t a supreme court in any established democracy that would waste their time hearing such a case.

    Notwithstanding any of the above, this is nothing but an attempt by a body of religious fanatics to control the national culture and mould it into something over which they have direct power. Do you think the majority of us are ever going to allow that? Give your head a shake.

    I feel for the Chief Justice. I’m sure she has an opinion. But her position is untenable in that she cannot state it outside a courtroom and then only after she has heard arguments and read submitted briefs. I know there are people who wish she would simply take a stand and tell the nutballs to sit on their thumbs and rotate. That would definitely result in her dismissal… and we would end up with a Harper appointed hack.

    Oh yeah… what Gayle said.

  15. RT, re your byline, is the original not: “Ready, fire, aim?” Seems to capture the same gist. Such drama over nationalist and jingoist twaddle re who constitutes a “good” Canadian as opposed to who constitutes a “bad” Canadian. This whole debate is just one more example of blinders on re the institutional role played by the OOC. Patriotism is just such a dumb beast to be manipulated at will to capture both Left and Right. And Don Cherry’s name still hasn’t been put forward!

  16. Facts just get in the way of moving forward with an agenda. And when they do, you just make new ones. The problem for the conjobs is that not everyone plays this game and it will catch up. Hello Iraq.

  17. The Connies care for fact less than would a dead rat. They made the complaint to educe an impression on their target audience. It’s the politics of small minds and big bitches.

  18. “Dion prods Harper on abortion stance” an article at National Post

    http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=740247

    It is very interesting that Stéphane Dion would volunteer to start public discussion on abortion issue considering that not so long ago his wife Janine Krieber, has warned Canadians of possibility of terrorist acts by pro-abortion fanatics, see;
    http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jun/08061807.html

    As far as we know Stéphane Dion and his wife are unable to conceive a child on their own and this is why they opted to adopt a Peruvian girl, see:
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/liberals/dion.html
    Here is quote;

    “Stéphane himself does not appear to be particularly religious. He only married his wife, political scientist Janine Krieber, so they could adopt a daughter, Jeanne, from Catholic Peru in 1988. Before that the two had lived together, like so many Quebecers of their generation, for almost 10 years — from when they were students at Laval,..”

    It is still unclear if this infertility issue in Dion’s family is caused by the fact that Stéphane Dion has no balls (well established fact of current political life in Canada) or is it because his wife Janine Krieber had way too many botched abortions performed by Dr. Henry Morgentaler at his Montreal abortion clinic.

    If the second possibility is the case than it would make perfect sense that Stéphane Dion prompted by his wife would make an attempt to strangle Dr. Henry Morgentaler and all of his supporters at the first opportunity he would ever got (Hell knows no fury as woman robed of her fertility).

    I somehow like the idea of Dion tightening the noose around Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin’s neck. Considering controversy surrounding nomination of Dr. Henry Morgentaler to the Order of Canada and considering the fact that Chief Justice is already back pedalling on this issue, Dion’s call on Harper to state his position on abortion is nothing short of Dion shooting Liberal Party in a foot. Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin and Governor General of Canada Michaelle Jean are currently the two highest ranking Liberals on government payroll, both are mired in Morgentaler controversy, so why is Dion pushing on abortion button now???

    If you want to know “How Old Boys’ Errand Girls took “decisive action” on abortion file in Canada.” please follow this link: http://www.bloggingtories.ca/forums/post43219.html#43219

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s