Supreme absurdity

In ruling (six to one) that Stephen Harper's appointee to the Supreme Court is  not qualified, the Supreme Court has, once again, embarrassed itself.

Christie Blatchford nailed it last Friday:

"It is a disgraceful decision, the final howl of which is this: How dare the executive branch, the government, have gone and picked a judge and amended a law?" ...

So did Brian Lilley:



Today Andrew Coyne agreed that the Supremes' ruling is absurd:

... "this is just the sort of flaky decision the Court is capable of ..." [although Coyne wanders off into irrelevant territory and ridiculous and gratuitous insults to Judge Nadon.]

 As did  Constitutional Law Professor, Grant Huscroft:

The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in the Nadon Reference is as bad a decision as the Court has made in recent memory.

... The result is absurd, according to Justice Moldaver, because Judge Nadon would become eligible for appointment to the Supreme Court if he were to rejoin the Quebec bar for as little as a single day.

This supremely absurd decision is a result either of gross over-thinking of the problem or of a conspiracy by activist judges to disqualify someone they don't like. Both possibilities cast serious doubt on the "wisdom" of their previous rulings.

In any case, dissenting Justice Moldaver offered a simple remedy. Nadon should immediately rejoin the Quebec bar. All Stephen Harper has to do is reappoint him.