The McGill Law Journal Podcast

li>ol]:list-[lower-alpha] [&_ol>li>ol>li>ol]:list-[lower-roman] [&_ol>li>ol>li>ol>li>ol]:list-[list-decimal] [&_[data-user]]:text-primary [&_:is(pre)]:overflow-auto [&_:is(table)]:w-full [&_:is(table,th,td)]:border [&_:is(table,th,td)]:border-collapse [&_:is(table,th,td)]:border-gray-300 [&_:is(table,th,td)]:p-2 [&_:is(strong,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6)]:font-semibold [&_:is(h1)]:text-2xl [&_:is(h2)]:text-lg [&_:is(h3)]:text-md [&_h1:not(:first-child)]:mt-8 [&_h1:not(:last-child)]:mb-6 [&_h2:not(:first-child)]:mt-6 [&_h2:not(:last-child)]:mb-4 [&_h3:not(:first-child)]:mt-4 [&_pre]:bg-palette-gray-200 [&_pre>code]:bg-transparent [&_pre>code]:px-0 [&_pre>code]:py-0 [&_pre]:px-[6px] [&_pre]:py-[2px] [&_pre]:m-0 [&_pre]:rounded-[4px] [&_code]:bg-palette-gray-200 [&_code]:px-[6px] [&_code]:py-[2px] [&_code]:m-0 [&_code]:rounded-[4px] [&_blockquote]:m-0 [&_blockquote]:px-[16px] [&_blockquote]:py-0 [&_blockquote]:text-subtle [&_blockquote]:border-l-[4px] [&_blockquote]:border-palette-gray-200 overflow-x-auto [&_ol]:pl-5 [&_li]:my-2 [&_:is(p,ul,ol):not(:first-child)]:mt-3 [&_:is(p,ul,ol):not(:last-child)]:mb-3" data-testid="render-markdown"> This McGill Law Journal podcast episode features Nathaniel (Nate) Erskine-Smith discussing the federal government's intervention in the Supreme Court of Canada challenge to Quebec's Bill 21. The conversation explores the interpretation and use of the Charter's notwithstanding clause (Section 33), the reasoning behind the federal government's measured position, and the importance of protecting constitutional rights and accountability while preserving Section 33's intended role.

This episode explores the constitutional battle surrounding Quebec's Bill 21 and its implications for religious freedom, gender equality, and minority rights. The discussion examines the tension between Section 28 of the Canadian Charter, which guarantees gender equality, and Section 33, the notwithstanding clause, which Quebec used to shield the law from certain Charter challenges. Featuring perspectives from Professor Vrinda Narain and Me Cee Strauss, the episode considers whether Section 28 can limit the use of Section 33 and what the Supreme Court of Canada's decision could mean for the future of equality rights and legislative power in Canada.

This McGill Law Journal podcast episode discusses the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil in Canada, focusing on its exceptional nature and its impact on corporate governance and access to justice. Daniel Grodinsky, a commercial litigator, explains the criteria for lifting the corporate veil in Quebec, emphasizing the need to prove shareholders as alter egos, use of the corporation to mask wrongdoing, and the nature of the wrong committed. Douglas Sarro, a law professor, highlights the restrictive approach of Canadian courts, exemplified by the 2018 Chevron case, and suggests potential evolutions in corporate accountability through alternative theories. The conversation underscores the tension between certainty and justice in corporate law.

In this episode, MLJ Podcast Committee member Megan Campbell sits down with Professor Sébastien Jodoin and Professor David Lepofsky for a discussion of accessibility in legal education and practice. Topics include wellness in legal pedagogy, the need for disability-inclusive law school curricula, and the role of lived experience in legal research.   For up-to-date information about the Disability Inclusive Climate Action Research Program, please visit https://www.disabilityinclusiveclimate.org/ For more information about the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Alliance, please visit www.aodaalliance.org David Lepofsky's Open Source Memoir, "Swimming Up Niagara Falls": https://wyaj.uwindsor.ca/index.php/wyaj/article/view/8579 "People With Disabilities Need Lawyers Too! A Ready-To-Use Plan for Law Schools to Educate Law Students to Effectively Serve the Legal Needs of Clients With Disabilities as Well as Clients Without Disabilities": https://wyaj.uwindsor.ca/index.php/wyaj/article/view/7780

In this episode, 1L podcast committee members Ben Rutkowski, Erin Porter, and Adela Pirillo are joined by Professor Robert Austin, Associate Director of the Center for European and Eurasian Studies at the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy. They discuss the complex legacies of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, with a particular eye to the treatment of women in transitional justice. They reflect on what lessons can be drawn from the ICTY for future transitional justice processes.   Please note that this episode contains discussion of sexual and gender-based violence. Take care when listening.  

Alongside renowned Kahnawà:ke Mohawk activist and scholar Taiaiake Alfred, 1L MLJ Podcast Committee members Aaminah Qureshi, Mia Kruger and Tarek Maussili discuss the pitfalls of "pretendianism"—the phenomenon of non-Indigenous people misappropriating Indigenous identities. Their conversation includes reflections on modes of Indigenous self-identification, and on the material harms of opportunities for Indigenous communities being misallocated.

Les référendums sectoriels, bien que peu fréquents dans l'histoire canadienne, ont fait surface dans la paysage politique au cours des dernières années. Ceux-ci soulèvent des questions cruciales sur le pouvoir des provinces et leur potentiel impact sur les relations entre gouvernements. Dans cet épisode, les membres de l'équipe podcast RDM Félix Lévesque, Magali Shimotakahara et Hubert Dupuis accueillent Patrick Taillon, professeur titulaire à la Faculté de droit de l'Université Laval, afin de mieux comprendre les impacts des référendums sectoriels organisés par les provinces sur les dynamiques fédérales—accordant une attention particulière aux relations Québec-Canada.

In this episode, MLJ Podcast Committee member Ezequiel Indriago Perez sits down with Spencer Nestico-Semianiw to discuss his article "Newcomers to Canada: Assessing a Civil Right of Action in Canadian Courts for Crimes Against Humanity and Aggression Committed Abroad." Nestico-Semianiw's article is available in full in the McGill Law Journal's Volume 70, Issue 4.

Members of the MLJ 1L Podcast team sit down with McGill's Co-Director of the Institute of Air and Space Law, Prof. Andrea Harrington. From governance frameworks to new forms of liability, this discussion explores one of private law's newest and most challenging frontiers.

Le RDM accueille la juge Sally Gomery de la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario pour une discussion sur l'application de la loi anti-SLAPP. S'appuyant sur l'affaire Di Franco c. Bueckert, la juge Gomery et les membres de l'équipe du podcast 1L, Alice Viollet et Samuel Schonfeld, discutent de l'évolution du paysage anti-SLAPP à l'ère numérique.