As many Slaw readers will know, much of the trading in finds and pointers on the internet has moved into “real time” applications, principally Twitter. Because not everyone uses Twitter—and because those of us who do will each follow different groups—Slaw will test out a new weekly feature that brings you a selection of interesting tweets relating to things we haven’t otherwise posted about. These are chosen (by me) from a collection of tweets proposed, in this first go-round, by Slaw contributors. (Apologies for the fact that too many are from me: it’s just a pump priming.)

But we’d like . . . [more]

We’re late to the party on this one, which has been bouncing around the internet over the last week, starting with a claim (by Barbara Ann Radnofsky, a lawyer and a candidate for the office of Texas attorney general) in the Fort Worth Star Telegram, picked up by the Huffington Post, that a 2005 amendment to the Texas Constitution effectively wiped out legal marriage there. The thing that has Radnofsky fussed — and scornful — is Paragraph (b) of Section 32 of Article 1 (Bill of Rights), which reads as follows:

(b) This state or a political

I recently had the pleasure of meeting a man with an extraordinary career which has been untimely cut short and I want to use this platform to draw attention to a true renaissance man. Justice David Marshall of the Ontario Superior Court, MD, LLB passed away unexpectedly a week ago today. While I did not know Justice Marshall well, upon meeting him one could not help but marvel at his career and list of accomplishments; regardless of his list of accomplishments, I was immediately struck by the genuine interest he took in the people he had just met. Over . . . [more]

Since today seems to be a quiz Friday, here’s an easy one to kick off this Friday Fillip. Who is this debonaire man?

. . . [more]

Slaw reaches 5000 posts. For a law blog that’s awesome, and for a Canadian legal information blog, unthinkable.

And we have been told just this week that we’ve been recognized by the Law Foundation of Ontario and will be receiving a grant which will permit us to take Slaw to even greater heights. Thank you Law Foundation.

Over the next few months we’ll unveil our plans and respond to unmet needs, through Slaw.

As many of you know Slaw is deliberately unhierarchical in its structure and operations. Steve Matthews, Connie Crosby and I form three parts of our loose four-person . . . [more]

Three unrelated thoughts on law and honour. . . . [more]

Given the current news stories arising out of the Commonwealth leaders meeting and the Ugandan anti-homosexuality bill introduced last month, I thought it might be useful for Slaw readers to have access to the actual language of the bill. (I guess it’s too much to ask the mainstream media outlets to either quote the legislation at length, in cases such as this, or provide a link to a web location for the text of legislation under discussion.)

A PDF photocopy of the bill is available on the Box Turtle Bulletin site, as is an HTML text version. . . . [more]

[QUIZZIN 1] . . . [more]

After months of deliberation, the CRTC today finally approved Al-Jazeera English for distribution in Canada, without conditions.

What’s remarkable about this decision is, well, that it’s entirely unremarkable. To all appearances, this should have been a relatively easy regulatory call: Al-Jazeera English fit squarely within the new regulatory framework announced a year ago for distribution of non-Canadian news services, where the CRTC stated that it would generally approve such services absent “clear evidence” that the service would violate Canadian regulations. There was strong demand for the service, as shown by the 2600 interventions in favour. Furthermore, Al-Jazeera English wisely engaged . . . [more]

Shaunna’s mention of TwitterCommons prompted me to point out poliTwitter, which aggregates federal and provincial politicians’ Twitter feeds. The interface is a tad clunky (the dropdown menus are awkward to use), but there’s lots here to like.

Non-politicians tweeting on political issues are captured in the “community” display. You can sort by party affiliation, and the statistics are fascinating. Trend tracking via hastag, of course. And the search allows you to find your MP/MPP. . . . [more]

On November 25, 2009 Bill C-36, An act to amend the Criminal Code, otherwise known as Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act passed 3rd reading in the House of Commons by a vote of 187 to 69.

The bill amends provisions in the Criminal Code regarding the right of persons convicted of murder or high treason to apply for early parole through the elimination of the “faint hope” clause. Using the new ability to link to a section of the Criminal Code, here is the current legislation.

One definition of hope is “to desire with . . . [more]

Of the many challenges facing trial judges, one of the greatest is conducting proceedings with a self-represented accused. Invariably the self-represented accused comes to court with only a rudimentary knowledge of the trial process, often influenced by misleading depictions from television shows and the movies. He or she is unfamiliar with the substantive law, is confused by procedural requirements, and has difficulty grasping concepts such as relevance.

The burgeoning number of self-represented accused in the criminal courts may be explained by cut-backs to legal aid funding across the country, the cost of legal services, mental health problems that make it . . . [more]