Dunsmuir, Chevron, and what Canadians and Americans can learn from each other
about judicial deference and interventionism
Not exact matches
We hear and read long soliloquies from the courts
about mutual respect,
deference to each other's decisions and
judicial comity.
Deference is
about the way in which a court treats an administrative decision, primarily on
judicial review but also in other contexts, where the legitimacy of the decision is in question.
I want to come back to the issue of
judicial review — both of legislation and of administrative decisions — and
deference,
about which I wrote earlier this week.
In that post, I suggested that our views on
deference in
judicial review are a function of our deeper beliefs on such principles as democracy and the Rule of Law, as well as on the institutional competence of the various branches of government, and that a coherent set of such beliefs could produce superficially inconsistent views
about the degree of
deference appropriate in various sorts of
judicial review.