Soren Frederiksen

Both are good examples of how billing (or IT) systems can structure program delivery. Sometimes this is by design but often it’s at the expense of program goals.

“The OMA says the billing system has not kept pace with surgical innovation and often doesn’t account for newer or more complex surgeries. This has led to some doctors no longer offering procedures to patients over fear of not getting paid, while others choose to leave the province.”

This surgeon reattached his patient's fingers, but Ontario didn't pay him for nearly three years. His story exposes an OHIP billing crisis - Toronto Star

This reminds me of an incident where we had to redesign program requirements because of limitations of the Registrar’s systems.

For the umpteenth time: itch is NOT a verb!

If my 1:10 travel time for what's usually a 40 minute subway ride is anything to go on, the TTC is not ready for Toronto to return to the office.

Bad air quality measurements across Toronto.

I think I'll skip my run for today:

Swedish bodyguards reveal PM’s location on fitness app The secret service uploaded details of Ulf Kristersson’s movements to Strava.

This isn't the first time this sort of thing has happened: www.politico.eu/article/ulf-...

As one does.

Important privacy news this morning, not that the results are a surprise:

Joint investigation by Canada and U.K. says 23andMe failed to protect customer data - CTV News

It's such a nice example of how the structure of law and government structures political disputes.

Finally, what I find so fascinating about this is that when economic crises occurred in both countries the subsequent constitutional questions reflect the mechanisms deployed to check federal power: in the US separation of powers between the branches and in Canada between the levels of govt.

Since Canada has a parliamentary system of government with a comparatively weak federal government, the question was not a separation of powers question. A Prime Minister with a majority government can always pass legislation in Canada. Instead it was a federalism question.

The Supreme Court found that it was and in the process gave us our modern leading case on the national emergency power under POGG. The case is here, if you're interested: canlii.ca/t/1mzjg

To over-simplify: the key question was whether this double-digit inflation was an emergency for the purposes of the national emergency branch of the Peace, order, and good government provision (POGG) of the 1867 Constitution Act.

By the mid-1970s, Canada was in an inflationary crisis. The Federal Government responded with the Anti-Inflation Act in 1975. The constitutionality of this legislation was immediately questioned, so in 1976, the feds referred a series of questions to the Supreme Court.

Third, the discussion of the constitutional issues around separation of powers and the limits of delegation was a great reminder of the differences between the two countries.

Second, while I knew a little about the monetary crises of the early 1970s, I didn't know anything about the legal history of the American response. I found that discussion fascinating, leading to an interesting if somewhat obvious interpretation exercise.

First, I didn't know that this court existed although I do remember a reference to its former incarnation as the Customs Court. A new (to me) court with specialized jurisdiction is always interesting. The decision is here: www.cit.uscourts.gov/sites/cit/fi...

The US Court of International Trade decision in the tariff case is quite interesting from my Canadian perspective. Sure it may, however temporarily, limit the ability of the President to impose sanctions on Canada, but more interestingly it is a look into an area of US law that I didn't know about.

Reddit feed showing a Toronto lawyer accused by a judge if using AI in submissions with an accompanying ad for OpenAI aimed at students.

Justice Department halts funds for programs for victims of hate crimes, child abuse, school violence and more At least two of the 365 grants have since been restored. Nonprofits call it a "devastating blow."

Trump’s DOJ has revoked funding for nearly 400 nonprofits, including organizations that:

-Advocate for non-English speaking crime victims
-Support victims of child abuse, hate crimes, and human trafficking 
-Work to reduce school shootings

Devastating.

PhD Timeline

Yep. Graduate student recruitment is going to be impossible at US schools.

xkcd.com/3081

Judge temporarily blocks Ford government’s bike lane removals — The Globe and Mail Injunction prevents Ontario from ripping up Bloor, University and Yonge bike lanes until resolution of Charter challenge

I have my doubts about the success of the bike lane Charter challenge, but there's clearly enough there to justify an injunction.

apple.news/ARdY_EnktT9q...

National Science Foundation cancels research grants related to misinformation and disinformation Hundreds of grants, fellowships, and awards were terminated because they are no longer "aligned with NSF priorities."

Obviously, researching the complex (and tremendously harmful) phenomenon of misinformation critically important.

The goal? Silence those fighting for the truth.

NSF cancels research grants related to misinformation www.niemanlab.org/2025/04/nati... via @niemanlab.org

‘An Enormous Usurpation’: Inside the Case Against Trump’s Tariffs The lawsuits challenging Trump’s trade war make powerful legal arguments. Is that enough?

Column: Inside the legal case against Trump’s tariffs that is probably stronger than you think, by former federal prosecutor Ankush Khardori.

Poilievre vows to use notwithstanding clause to support consecutive murder sentences — The Canadian Press Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre unveiled another plank of his tough-on-c

The natural follow-up question is to ask under what other circumstances he might use the notwithstanding clause?
apple.news/AI2sfxBFuQ8K...

To add: In immigration proceedings the admin law procedure can take precedence over the habeas application, but only where that procedure is at least as advantageous for the applicant. This is pretty well-explained under section 1 here: www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/...

From a Canadian point of view this is really interesting. In Canada habeas review remains with the superior courts while other admin law review has been transferred to Federal Court. The Federal Court only has habeas jurisdiction for Canadian Forces members serving overseas.

Bedraggled skunk in the snow

One of the York University's furry denizens was out in today's awful weather. It didn't look happy.