To: conservative in nyc
From the article: "In the ruling, Judge Phelan suggested that Mr. Khadr could face some hurdles in his passport application since national-security considerations were written into passport law after his case came to light. Mr. MacKay has now denied that reapplication using the new rules."
While I'm not particularly a fan of Peter McKay's as there's a lot of red-Toryism (RINOism) in his political history, he is a former Crown Prosecutor and seemingly a pretty smart lawyer.
This is actually a brilliant and big time ballsy move: essentially, the Harper government is daring activist Judges to attempt to overrule "black letter law" aimed at combating terrorism (Islamofascism).
If the Judges want a showdown with Parliament as to who's ultimately in charge, Harper & McKay couldn't possibly have picked more favorable terrain upon which to fight any battle for public opinion.
Smart money says the Judges realize as much & will be the ones to blink if Khadr now opts to challenge the law itself.
BTW, I'm amazed this thread hasn't generated 100+ comments from Canadian FReepers alone - this is truly huge!
12 posted on
08/30/2006 5:23:07 PM PDT by
GMMAC
(Discover Canada governed by Conservatives: www.CanadianAlly.com)
To: GMMAC
This news put a big smile on my face.
PMSHs ministers are working very well together.
I hope to see a strong and united front from the Conservatives once Parliament opens again too.
To: GMMAC; conservative in nyc
I think that the Court has already admitted the government's right when it inserted
obiter dictum to the efect that Khadr would not be immune to the new rules.
It seems to me that the obiter dictum was deliberately put into the reasons for judgment and if Khadr tries to take the new denial back to the court the obiter will quickly become ratio decidendi.
Otherwise why put it in the reasons for judgment?
15 posted on
08/30/2006 8:39:41 PM PDT by
Clive
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson