Explain whether you think the state is ever justified in curtailing civil liberties and if you think the Trudeau government’s invocation of the War Measures Act in response to the FLQ kidnapping of Pierre Laporte and James Cross in 1970 was justified.

1200 word max (excluding footnotes) due noon December 13 2021.
To be uploaded to the Essay assignment dropbox on Canvas (which automatically submits the paper to Turnitin.com, a plagiarism detection website, providing an “originality report” to the author and grader of the paper).
Choose 1 of the following 6 questions: *N.B. Question 4 has been added to the five other questions listed in the course syllabus.
Edmund Burke once wrote: “Liberty, too, must be limited in order to be possessed.” Explain whether you think the state is ever justified in curtailing civil liberties and if you think the Trudeau government’s invocation of the War Measures Act in response to the FLQ kidnapping of Pierre Laporte and James Cross in 1970 was justified.
According to Canadian family court judge, Harvey Brownstone, “Divorcing spouses can sometimes continue litigating for years. Often one (or both) of the parties abandons the case. Frequently, the parties themselves end up negotiating a settlement, which the court takes into account in its order. Very rarely, though, does a family case proceed quickly to court.” Argue whether you agree with Brownstone that family court “should be the last resort”. Explain why. In developing your argument, consider: What alternatives are there? Why are they preferable? When may court nevertheless prove necessary?
In his essay, On Liberty, Mill claims that society may punish some conduct by law but it must do so on the basis that the conduct in question causes injury or harm to others; it is not sufficient justification to prohibit the person from doing something for their own good. Argue whether you think Canada’s Criminal Law, which makes the victim’s consent no defence to lawful homicide (except in cases of medical assistance in dying) is justified on the basis of the harm principle (or any additional reasons you deem relevant).
Although Canadian common law recognizes the right to refuse treatment, even by advance directive, it also acknowledges a difference between refusing and demanding specific medical treatment. When the Criminal Code was amended to permit medical assistance in dying in 2016, only patients who were conscious and competent to consent to MAiD were eligible. In March 2021, Parliament amended the Criminal Code again, permitting patients whose MAiD requests have been approved to receive MAiD after they lose capacity, if they sign a formal waiver of final consent. Argue whether you think people should be able to consent to MAiD in advance of losing capacity. If so, are there any circumstances in which they should not be permitted to do so? Why or why not?
What does the Westray Mine Disaster, and its aftermath, indicate about the relationship between law and power? Explain.
To what extent is prohibiting sheltered workshops both necessary and sufficient when it comes to advancing the equality rights of adults with intellectual disabilities? Explain.
Grading Criteria:
/9 Good research and effective marshaling of resources? Your essay must include at least 2 academic sources (journal article, book) in addition to works assigned in the readings.
/9 A clear thesis, supported by well-developed, cogent arguments?
/5 A coherent structure (intro, body, conclusion)?
/8 Effective writing—clear, direct, incisive?
/5 A well edited text, free of typographical and grammatical errors?
/4 Citations, conformity to the McGill Guide to Uniform Legal Citation?
/40

Last Completed Projects