It was not a surprise that the Ontario Court of Appeal told Doug Ford to go pound sand with regard to its objections to the federal carbon price, which is exactly what they did in a 4-1 decision, affirming the Saskatchewan decision that the price is not a tax but a regulatory charge, and that it’s not unconstitutional. Ford, predictably, vowed to take this to the Supreme Court of Canada, and given that they agreed to hear the Saskatchewan case, it’s likely these two will be heard together, where you can pretty much bet that the majority of the judges there will tell Moe, Ford, and the likes, to similarly go pound sand. As for the dissenting judge on the Ontario panel, well, he has a pretty interesting history of his legal philosophy, and was unusually appointed directly to the Court of Appeal from his being a law professor.
Meanwhile, here’s some analysis, with threads by Andrew Leach, plus Lindsay Tedds on the whole tax/regulatory charge difference.
The Court is trolling @jkenney here: "The failure of (the pan-Canadian approach) reflects the reality that one or more dissenting provinces can defeat a national solution to a matter of national concern." pic.twitter.com/q6UfWVhrmP
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) June 28, 2019
Court: "federal jurisdiction in this field is narrowly constrained to address the risk of provincial inaction regarding a problem that requires cooperative action." This is a crucial framing of the federal action here. Provinces still have plenty of scope.
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) June 28, 2019
Important point here for all policy debates. Just because you think a policy is dumb doesn’t mean it is unconstitutional. “I’ll see you in court” is used too often by politicians. Side note: this by @KatePuddister is on my reading list https://t.co/K3CBY5ITux pic.twitter.com/BxbKcUGAAq
— Trevor Tombe (@trevortombe) June 28, 2019
https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1144686800348340226
https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1144687790367674368
https://twitter.com/cmathen/status/1144706969493749761
https://twitter.com/cmathen/status/1144708330037874692
Meanwhile, the BC government’s lawyers were in Alberta court on Friday to argue for an injunction against the province’s blatantly unconstitutional “turn off the taps” legislation now that it’s been proclaimed, likening it to a loaded gun that they don’t want to go off accidentally. The hitch, of course, is the question of whether BC has standing to go to Alberta court over the case, so we’ll see what the judge decides there.