Leonid Sirota

The Bike Lanes and the Clown Cars In defence of the controversial decision holding that demolishing bike lanes in Toronto is unconstitutional

New post: the Cycle Toronto decision, which holds that a law requiring the demolition of certain bike lanes is unconstitutional, may seem counter-intuitive, but it is actually right. Demands that the notwithstanding clause be used to undo it misconceive not only the decision, but democracy itself.

She took the exact same position. Nothing to see here, just respecting people - but also, we'll fly the flag of a political movement with a specific programme that goes well beyond that. That she may not buy into that programme herself is irrelevant.

ICYMI, on R (Smith) v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police, which held that uniformed police taking part in a Pride march breached their duty of impartiality.

Motte and Bailey Unreasonableness There is much to learn from a recent English decision on police impartiality

New post, discussing (at awful length, I'm afraid) last week's Administrative Court decision on police participation in a Pride march. Come for nerdery on standing and reasonableness review, stay for musings on whether there is too much law and on culture war stuff.

My latest for @jotwell.bsky.social, reviewing a great paper on the early history of Canadian originalism by Preston Jordan Lim.

This really *is* Liberation Day: The U.S. Court of International Trade this afternoon struck down Trump’s mass tariffs as unlawful. It’s a fantastic win for the rule of law, human freedom, and prosperity, and a deserved rebuke for arbitrary one-man rule over our livelihoods. /1

The #Mankad inspires all sorts of thoughts, including on the spirit of business. #IPL2025 reminded us of our post on this!

The Spirit of Business and Sport This post is co-authored with Leonid Sirota* Should a cricket player forgo taking runs as a result of an opponent’s mistake? Adherents of a certain understanding of the “spirit of cricket” thi…

For those who've watched yesterday's #LSGvRCB drama, a post from @akamalnath.bsky.social's and my archives!

Stickin’ It to The (Strong)Man The classical roots of Donald Trump’s thuggish incompetence.

All attempts to make nationalism something more than the organization of sentiment, an empire of feeling, requires ransacking the intellectual supply depot for barbed wire or steel bars that can be constructed to contain it, Jonah Goldberg writes:
thedispatch.com/newsletter/g...

Victims of Communism Day - 2025 NOTE: This post largely reprints last year's Victims of Communism Day post, with some modifications. Today is May Day. Since 2007, I have advocated

My annual post on why May Day should be Victims of Communism Day: reason.com/volokh/2025/...

Here we go again… why voting is not a privilege to be removed as punishment

Reckons ...

Unparliamentary language - New Zealand Parliament ‘Unbecoming’ language, insults, accusations of dishonesty... Parliamentary debate sometimes gets a little heated.

The NZ Parliament maintains a handy list of remarks protected by privilege despite their unparliamentary character: www.parliament.nz/en/visit-and....

Rules Matter Why the rules of government formation are the way they are, and why they matter

For more on government formation rules, and why winning a plurality of seats (short of a majority) is not decisive or even constitutionlaly significant, see e.g. doubleaspect.blog/2023/07/19/r...

This is what the Elections Canada results page looks like at the moment. I do not think they should be highlighting a "winner", let alone a "winner" who falls short of a majority. This is a judgment for Parliament, not for the people counting the votes.

But in BOTH types of systems, certain parties are exercise OUTSIZED power. A party that wins 15% of the seats but joins a governing coalition with one that won 40% of the seats is arguably exercising a more DISproportionate amount of power than a party governing with 42% of the national vote share.

Moreover, if the 'wasted' vote idea hinges on representation, and in MMP or other PR-type systems there are representatives elected who NO ONE directly voted for, there is every bit the normative objection at stake. But MY point is the objection is always silly, regardless.

Prioritizing persuasion, not coercion: The case against mandatory voting | Macdonald-Laurier Institute This commentary by Leonid Sirota breaks down arguments for mandatory voting and why they are lacking.

Your periodic reminder that there is no duty to vote: macdonaldlaurier.ca/prioritizing.... Don't reward people who haven't earned it.

Free Speech Crumbles in Europe Europeans are now routinely prosecuted and even jailed for what they say online.

For, as you may have suspected, this scenario is not fictional, Yascha Mounk writes.

Read the full story and ask yourself: Is free speech still free? thedispatch.com/article/euro...

A meme. A tweet. A WhatsApp message. In today’s Europe, any of these could land you in prison. Would you say that this nation has a problem with free speech?
If you do, then you should be very concerned about what has happened in Europe over the last few years.

Free Speech Crumbles in Europe Europeans are now routinely prosecuted and even jailed for what they say online.

Read the full story and ask yourself: Is free speech still free? thedispatch.com/article/euro...

You didn't just say you disagreed with my assessment. You said the comparison itself was puzzling. That's the striking thing for me. I wasn't and am not sure about what the reaction to PM Corbyn would have been. I am, indeed, pretty confident that he is akin (not identical) to Trump in many ways.

Had he won, would his critics have been attacked? You bet. Would he have kissed up to Putin? Every chance. Would he have tanked the economy? Hell yeah. Would have been as bad as Trump in every way? No, surely not. Would it have been even worse in some ways? Quite possible.

The man led a party engaged in anti-Semitic harrassment and discrimination and said that the findings to this effect were a political attack. Does that *equal* Trump? No, I don't think so. Does that warrant a comparison and some thoughts about what would have happened had they won? I think it does.

Is it your position that one shouldn't compare two political figures unless the lists of the iniquities that they have committed or would commit are identical, or at least precisely equal? In that case, I can only respond with a 'come on' of my own.

Why would anyone compare two populist blowhards with a three-year-old's understanding of economics, fondness for foreign dictators, and hatred towards minorities? It's a mystery!

Where Does a Constitution End? Is the constitution the explanation for the differences between the ways obnoxious leaders are dealt with in the US and the UK?

ICYMI: The UK shed Boris Johnson and Liz Truss with comparative ease, which the US seems unable to do to Donald Trump. Does that mean the British constitution is better than its American counterpart? doubleaspect.blog/2025/04/22/w...

Fair is Fair The requirements of due process are often minimal, but still important.

New post by @markpmancini.bsky.social on the importance of procedure and legal orderliness. doubleaspect.blog/2025/04/22/f...

Where Does a Constitution End? Is the constitution the explanation for the differences between the ways obnoxious leaders are dealt with in the US and the UK?

New post: a response to @lordnortonlouth.bsky.social's discusson of the constitutional differences between the UK and the US and their role in countering obnoxious leadership.

That's fair. But the people who defend 'living instrument' seldom take care to draw the distinction. And either way, none of that turns on the distasteful nature of the facts