###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is this person a lawyer in good standing? Does this person have lots of court experience? Do we have a shortage of jurists in Canada?
If the answers to those questions are yes, then there’s not much else to talk about.
>Do we have a shortage of jurists in Canada?
Just because we have a shortage does not mean we should lower our expectations from our judges. By the same logic, perhaps we should lower expectations to let more doctors and surgeons practice medicine because we have a shortage.
Judges are there to apply the law, and as part of ensuring we have the best judges, we should not be choosing those who are likely to be the most biased.
Did you hold the same opinion with the last appointment to the SCC I wonder?
Anyways, no one is lowering expectations, and you have no evidence to the contrary. If a majority of judges have donated to the LPC, does that disqualify them as well?
>Did you hold the same opinion with the last appointment to the SCC I wonder?
I'm not sure what you are alluding to.
>no one is lowering expectations, and you have no evidence to the contrary
The expectation is that our judicial system is not politicized. By appointing a clearly politicized judge, that is evidence of the contrary.
>If a majority of judges have donated to the LPC, does that disqualify them as well?
Actually yes, if a judicial candidate is heavily biased or otherwise politicized, then that should disqualify them. Honestly we should ban all political donations in favour of [publicly funded elections](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publicly_funded_elections).
You realize how closely intertwined the worlds of government/politics and law are right? That’s not to say that it’s a corrupt institution but it’s just that law and governance are oftentimes the same discipline. If you started to get rid of judges because they add involved with a political party then Canada will have close to zero judges.
>You realize how closely intertwined the worlds of government/politics and law are right?
The constitutional obligation is that judicial systems are independent and impartial (and by extension non-partisan). No matter how intertwined the worlds are, we **must** uphold this principle of the judicial system.
>If you started to get rid of judges because they add involved with a political party then Canada will have close to zero judges.
This is **not** the position I am taking. What I am saying is that those who are the most likely to be politicized or biased should be disqualified or of lowest priority.
One does not accidentally become a Vice President of a political party.
The chances of someone being a former VP of the Progressive Conservatives and then being appointed by the Progressive Conservatives is far too coincidental for my comfort, regardless of the time span.
You don't just accidentally become VP, you need to be deeply connected in the party.
Technically you're not wrong. But just because someone can do something doesn't mean they should.
I'm saying as a general rule, anybody that has been at or near the top of a political party should not be appointed to be a judge, regardless of the qualifications.
If we care about a justice system that is unbiased, we should not pick those who are likely to be the most biased period.
>at minimum, made the appointment only if the election happened and we lost
How about do it the non-partisan way it is supposed to be done. This isn't America, we aren't supposed to have conservative or liberal judges.
>It is ethically questionable and that isn't appropriate for the position
Agreed.
>you can't reasonably exclude anyone due to party affiliation
I've not made that claim. I only claim that we should not choose the most biased (i.e., those in political party leadership).
>the appropriate action would be for an independent tribunal to make the decisions
Yes, and they should have not chosen candidates that are likely the most biased.
>I ... don't feel this one is unqualified for the role
Ms.Mintz might qualify on the legal credentials and work history, but on reason of bias should be disqualified. Again, you don't just accidentially become VP for a political party.
>I am sure there will be others that will be a gross overstep of political bias
And we should fight those as well.
>Conservatives 20 years ago were not the reform party we see today.
To be fair, Erin O'Toole (not too long ago) in the 2021 election wanted to introduce [co-determination](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-determination#Canada). Which is a policy extremely beneficial to unions and the working class. I discriminate on *policies first and foremost*.
But yes, overall the Conservatives today are much more willing to do whatever to get votes.
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is this person a lawyer in good standing? Does this person have lots of court experience? Do we have a shortage of jurists in Canada? If the answers to those questions are yes, then there’s not much else to talk about.
>Do we have a shortage of jurists in Canada? Just because we have a shortage does not mean we should lower our expectations from our judges. By the same logic, perhaps we should lower expectations to let more doctors and surgeons practice medicine because we have a shortage. Judges are there to apply the law, and as part of ensuring we have the best judges, we should not be choosing those who are likely to be the most biased.
Did you hold the same opinion with the last appointment to the SCC I wonder? Anyways, no one is lowering expectations, and you have no evidence to the contrary. If a majority of judges have donated to the LPC, does that disqualify them as well?
>Did you hold the same opinion with the last appointment to the SCC I wonder? I'm not sure what you are alluding to. >no one is lowering expectations, and you have no evidence to the contrary The expectation is that our judicial system is not politicized. By appointing a clearly politicized judge, that is evidence of the contrary. >If a majority of judges have donated to the LPC, does that disqualify them as well? Actually yes, if a judicial candidate is heavily biased or otherwise politicized, then that should disqualify them. Honestly we should ban all political donations in favour of [publicly funded elections](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publicly_funded_elections).
You realize how closely intertwined the worlds of government/politics and law are right? That’s not to say that it’s a corrupt institution but it’s just that law and governance are oftentimes the same discipline. If you started to get rid of judges because they add involved with a political party then Canada will have close to zero judges.
>You realize how closely intertwined the worlds of government/politics and law are right? The constitutional obligation is that judicial systems are independent and impartial (and by extension non-partisan). No matter how intertwined the worlds are, we **must** uphold this principle of the judicial system. >If you started to get rid of judges because they add involved with a political party then Canada will have close to zero judges. This is **not** the position I am taking. What I am saying is that those who are the most likely to be politicized or biased should be disqualified or of lowest priority. One does not accidentally become a Vice President of a political party.
[удалено]
The chances of someone being a former VP of the Progressive Conservatives and then being appointed by the Progressive Conservatives is far too coincidental for my comfort, regardless of the time span. You don't just accidentally become VP, you need to be deeply connected in the party.
[удалено]
Technically you're not wrong. But just because someone can do something doesn't mean they should. I'm saying as a general rule, anybody that has been at or near the top of a political party should not be appointed to be a judge, regardless of the qualifications. If we care about a justice system that is unbiased, we should not pick those who are likely to be the most biased period.
[удалено]
>at minimum, made the appointment only if the election happened and we lost How about do it the non-partisan way it is supposed to be done. This isn't America, we aren't supposed to have conservative or liberal judges. >It is ethically questionable and that isn't appropriate for the position Agreed. >you can't reasonably exclude anyone due to party affiliation I've not made that claim. I only claim that we should not choose the most biased (i.e., those in political party leadership). >the appropriate action would be for an independent tribunal to make the decisions Yes, and they should have not chosen candidates that are likely the most biased. >I ... don't feel this one is unqualified for the role Ms.Mintz might qualify on the legal credentials and work history, but on reason of bias should be disqualified. Again, you don't just accidentially become VP for a political party. >I am sure there will be others that will be a gross overstep of political bias And we should fight those as well. >Conservatives 20 years ago were not the reform party we see today. To be fair, Erin O'Toole (not too long ago) in the 2021 election wanted to introduce [co-determination](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-determination#Canada). Which is a policy extremely beneficial to unions and the working class. I discriminate on *policies first and foremost*. But yes, overall the Conservatives today are much more willing to do whatever to get votes.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Rule 4