[edcoil]

Is your point that Canada needs a Constitution?

[ex-snook]

The shortcoming is Courts should not make law, Legislatures should. Taking matters out of voter hands is lose-lose for courts and for citizens.

[discostu]

I'm with him on most of his points, but I doubt highly Americans will be following every thrust, most American consider confirmation hearings to be one of the least interesting things our generally boring government does.

[goldstategop]

Canada's parliamentary system gives the Prime Minister virtually unlimited power. He is more than a primus inter pares = first among equals. The Prime Minister is the boss and as long as his party commands the support of the House Of Commons, he can do anything he wants and he can appoint any one he wants without the need for a bothersome confirmation process. There's no checks and balances and no separation of powers. The system renders the Opposition as impotent as a toothless hen.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[NetValue]

"But in the U.S., which really is a democracy, Bush would have virtually no chance of getting his nominee confirmed without a hefty number of Democrats on side."

The US is still a Republic, no matter what Canadians wish.

[Logical me]

"OK, OK -- with a Republican majority in the Senate, if Bush were bloody-minded enough, and prepared to have the Senate tied up in a filibuster week-after week, he could eventually push through his nominee, but that would tear both the Senate and the nation apart. "

What's the problem here. It is already, and has been for a long time, torn apart. But what we are seeing here is the total destruction of the Democrat party. The realization that the Democrat party is being destroyed for a few radical members will never be forgotten. Kennedy, Hitlery, and Schumer will be remembered as garbage, except to the few brain dead.

[NetValue]

"And take partisan politics out of the Supreme Court and give it back to the people."

The USSC is not an organization of "the people". If it were, the constitution would require it to be elected from the population. We might even have affirmative action and quotas on the court. WE DON'T, AND FOR GOOD REASON! The President is supposed to select based on EXCELLENCE (something we hear little about in America these days). Senate confirmation is the only participation by the representatives of the people. It takes the democrats in the Senate to make the selection and confirmation process partisan, as if "political" weren't bad enough.

[Wuli]

Thanks for this informative post. I never knew how little are the checks and balances for judicial appointments in Canada.

Canadians as a whole also seem to regard the judgements of their highest court decisions with greater acceptance and reverance than do Americans. Or am I mistaken on that?