Lucier v. the Queen

In Lucier v. The Queen, the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously held that a declaration against penal interest is inadmissible when that declaration is inculpatory of the accused. Although correct, the decision cannot be sup-ported on the basis of the Court\u27s reasoning. The Court failed to discharge its duty to give good reasons for its decisions, a duty of particular importance fora court of final appeal. This comment explores the reasoning that the Supreme Court could have provided in Lucier, and uses the case to illustrate a more widespread shortcoming in the Court\u27s approach to its appellate functions

The Rhetoric of Rights: The Supreme Court and the Charter

The Supreme Court of Canada\u27s initial interpretations of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms were as broad and liberal as could possibly have been expected. Invoking the metaphor of the constitution as a living tree and dismissing concerns about the legitimacy of its expanded role, the Court upheld the Charter arguments in the majority of the cases it decided during this first period. Even in those cases where the claim was denied, the Court made it clear that the Charter was to be taken very seriously. No one could mistake the Court\u27s message: the Charter was to be liberally interpreted and enthusiastically applied

Constitutional Scholarship in Canada

This article identifies and evaluates the kinds of constitutional scholarship currently produced in Canada and suggests some directions in which future research might profitably be directed Part I sets out the framework within which the state of Canadian constitutional scholarship will be assessed, considers some of the factors that have shaped that scholarship, and provides a brief overview of the various kinds of work being produced in Canada. Part II outlines some of the areas where more and different work needs to be done, concluding with some general thoughts on how the development of such directions in scholarship might be facilitated

Lucier v. the Queen

In Lucier v. The Queen, the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously held that a declaration against penal interest is inadmissible when that declaration is inculpatory of the accused. Although correct, the decision cannot be sup-ported on the basis of the Court\u27s reasoning. The Court failed to discharge its duty to give good reasons for its decisions, a duty of particular importance fora court of final appeal. This comment explores the reasoning that the Supreme Court could have provided in Lucier, and uses the case to illustrate a more widespread shortcoming in the Court\u27s approach to its appellate functions

Constitutional Scholarship in Canada

This article identifies and evaluates the kinds of constitutional scholarship currently produced in Canada and suggests some directions in which future research might profitably be directed Part I sets out the framework within which the state of Canadian constitutional scholarship will be assessed, considers some of the factors that have shaped that scholarship, and provides a brief overview of the various kinds of work being produced in Canada. Part II outlines some of the areas where more and different work needs to be done, concluding with some general thoughts on how the development of such directions in scholarship might be facilitated

Equality before the Law in the Supreme Court of Canada: A Case Study

The twentieth anniversary of the enactment of the Canadian Bill of Rights is being celebrated at a time of great political uncertainty in Canada. The fundamental structure of Canadian federalism, if not its very survival, is the subject of heated debate. Much of the debate revolves around the aspirations of the provinces to gain a larger measure of legislative authority over economic and cultural matters, and their desire to have a greater input into the governing process at the federal level. Within the context of this debate, the role of the Supreme Court of Canada is a crucial element

The Ursinus Weekly, June 8, 1970

289 students graduate Ursinus today: Brooks Hays selected speaker at graduation • 1970 Honorary Degree recipients • Ursinus College class of 1970 • Focus: Bob Keehn • Departmental honorshttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/weekly/1162/thumbnail.jp

The prevalence of femoroacetabular impingement anatomy in Division 1 aquatic athletes who tread water

Abstract Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is a disorder that causes hip pain and disability in young patients, particularly athletes. Increased stress on the hip during development has been associated with increased risk of cam morphology. The specific forces involved are unclear, but may be due to continued rotational motion, like the eggbeater kick. The goal of this prospective cohort study was to use magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to identify the prevalence of FAI anatomy in athletes who tread water and compare it to the literature on other sports. With university IRB approval, 20 Division 1 water polo players and synchronized swimmers (15 female, 5 male), ages 18–23 years (mean age 20.7 ± 1.4), completed the 33-item International Hip Outcome Tool and underwent non-contrast MRI scans of both hips using a 3 Tesla scanner. Recruitment was based on sport, with both symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals included. Cam and pincer morphology were identified. The Wilcoxon Signed-Rank/Rank Sum tests were used to assess outcomes. Seventy per cent (14/20) of subjects reported pain in their hips yet only 15% (3/20) sought clinical evaluation. Cam morphology was present in 67.5% (27/40) of hips, while 22.5% (9/40) demonstrated pincer morphology. The prevalence of cam morphology in water polo players and synchronized swimmers is greater than that reported for the general population and at a similar level as some other sports. From a clinical perspective, acknowledgment of the high prevalence of cam morphology in water polo players and synchronized swimmers should be considered when these athletes present with hip pain

Substance use disorders and behavioral addictions during the COVID-19 pandemic and COVID-19-related restrictions

COVID-19 was first identified in Wuhan, China in December of 2019 and appeared in the United States 1 month later. Between the onset of the pandemic and January 13, 2021, over 92 million people have tested positive for the virus and over 1.9 million people have died globally. Virtually every country in the world has been impacted by this virus. Beginning in March 2020, many U.S. state governments enforced a quarantine to respond to the growing health crisis. Citizens were required to remain at home; schools, restaurants, and non-essential businesses were forced to close, and large gatherings were prohibited. Americans\u27 lives were transformed in a span of days as daily routines were interrupted and people were shuttered indoors. Mounting fear and unpredictability coupled with widespread unemployment and social isolation escalated anxiety and impacted the mental health of millions across the globe. Most (53%) U.S. adults reported that the coronavirus outbreak has had a negative impact on their mental health, including inducing or exacerbating use of alcohol, drugs, gambling and overeating as coping mechanisms. In this paper, we will examine substance use and addictive behaviors that have been used to manage the stress and uncertainty wrought by the COVID-19 pandemic. We review the changing treatment landscape as therapy pivoted online and telemedicine became the norm