Second Chances

This paper examines the legislative response to the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in R. v. Daviault. The author argues that Bill C-72, which limits the defence of extreme intoxication, is constitutional because of its strong underpinnings in equality. The author reviews the statistics on violence against women and the role of intoxication in that violence to illustrate why the defence of intoxication raises issues of sex equality. The author argues that a court assessing the constitutionality of Bill C-72 should consider this strong foundation in equality and the fact that the Bill is the result of a careful balancing of the interests at stake by a democratically elected legislature

Bill of rights · Charter · Constitution · Constitutionality · Foundation (evidence · Law and economics · Legislature · Political science · Sociology · Supreme court · Legal Systems and Judicial Processes · Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies · Law