Made with Love

Could the new prostitution law withstand a future Supreme Court challenge?

blackram

Reviewer
Joined
Dec 17, 2010
Messages
14,008
A lot of people think that the new Conservative prostitution law, Bill C-36, may not withstand a Supreme Court challenge, if it were to be brought up to it (myself included). Some legal experts think that it may actually withstand a challenge better than the old laws did. Here's their point of view:



When the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the country’s prostitution laws late last year, the move was celebrated by advocates for the women and men who often prefer to be called sex trade workers. Prostitution itself had never been illegal in Canada. The court now found that the old prohibitions surrounding it—particularly laws that banned brothels and bargaining in public over the sale of sex—forced prostitutes into more dangerous ways of doing business. The judges ruled that preventing them from working inside or from trying to screen out potentially dangerous customers violated their right to “security of the person” under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. But Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin also wrote, in the final paragraphs of the unanimous decision, “That does not mean that Parliament is precluded from imposing limits on where and how prostitution may be conducted.”

Justice Minister Peter MacKay tabled a new anti-prostitution act, Bill C-36, early this month that ended speculation on what those new limits would be. Where and how? MacKay’s answer: no place and under no circumstances. His law’s main innovation is to make it illegal to buy sex anywhere, anytime. Selling sex, oddly enough, remains legal, except in any location where children might reasonably be expected to be found. Nothing in MacKay’s approach seems likely to make it easier for prostitutes to try to work more safely, along the lines the court discussed, raising immediate questions about how his legislation can avoid being ruled unconstitutional, just like the laws it replaces. According to several legal experts, though, MacKay’s act stands a reasonable chance of surviving the inevitable court challenge, thanks to the way it frames sweeping new objectives.
 
Why are you all so paranoid?.

Party, book her and get your dick wet.


This bill is so weak that before it becomes law I will be a grandfather.

Ease up guys.
 
DannyDeVito said:
Why are you all so paranoid?.

Party, book her and get your dick wet.


This bill is so weak that before it becomes law I will be a grandfather.

Ease up guys.

Not paranoid, the threat is real.
Majority governments can easily pass weak laws.
 
Coke said:
Too much reading late at night.

So it may not pass?.

That's not what the article was about. The article was about if the bill passes, then can it be overturned by the Supreme Court, and on what basis? The article argues that it might not be overturned.
 
blackram said:
That's not what the article was about. The article was about if the bill passes, then can it be overturned by the Supreme Court, and on what basis? The article argues that it might not be overturned.

The preamble to the bill is the key albeit some parts maybe overturned but the illegality of the john may stick which is where the danger for the client comes in. Gentleman start searching out your soul mate and this hobby will not be needed or listen to Danny and end up publicly humiliated or worse, behind bars.
 
If I were to start looking for my soulmate now, then I'd have to start getting divorced. :grrrrrr:
 
blackram said:
If I were to start looking for my soulmate now, then I'd have to start getting divorced. :grrrrrr:
:biggrin2:

All I know is we have to stop the Conservatives and their view of a Leave To Beaver type world minus Eddy Hascal.
 
Baz said:
The preamble to the bill is the key albeit some parts maybe overturned but the illegality of the john may stick which is where the danger for the client comes in. Gentleman start searching out your soul mate and this hobby will not be needed or listen to Danny and end up publicly humiliated or worse, behind bars.


Damn-Not too smartDamn-Not too smartDamn-Not too smart
 
Back
Top Bottom