Tod MaffinCanadian Commentator, From Far and Wide · Emotional Support Canadian

In Canada, the Supreme Court is not a suggestion box

20 Feb 2026 · 2 min

Watch on YouTube

1:47

The video presents a satirical commentary that juxtaposes a (fictional) U.S. Supreme Court ruling declaring former President Donald Trump's proposed tariffs illegal with the former president’s alleged intent to ignore the decision and impose more tariffs. The narrator then surveys several historical Canadian Supreme Court decisions—from the 1985 ruling on refugee oral hearings to the 2015 decision on assisted dying—highlighting that each time the Canadian federal or provincial governments complied with the Court’s judgments, even when the rulings contradicted existing policies. By contrasting the U.S. scenario with Canada’s pattern of respecting judicial authority, the speaker underscores the importance of the rule of law and critiques the notion of a Supreme Court as a “suggestion box.” A brief Trump soundbite about free trade is inserted for effect, and the narrator concludes by labeling the video concept itself as “a stupid idea.”

Chapters

Wait, do I have this right? The US Supreme Court just told glorious leader Chairman Trump that his tariffs are illegal, so he's going to ignore the highest court in the country and impose more tariffs? You know, sometimes in cases like this, it's helpful to get some context. A comparison of times when this sort of thing has happened in other countries and how those countries have handled that. In Canada, for instance, in 1986, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled against the government and reversed the burden of proof for drug possession. So the government— honored, honored their ruling. But in 2013, when the court ruled that prostitution laws made sex work more dangerous and violated the Charter of Rights, the government honored the ruling and Parliament replaced the laws. Ah, okay, but 2004, when the province of BC imposed fees on court hearings when the Supreme Court said that that limited access to justice, well, the government honored the ruling and rolled the fees back. Ah, here is where things get interesting. Now, in 1985, the Supreme Court ruled that refugee claimants are entitled to oral hearings. That went directly against federal immigration policy at the time, so the government honoured the ruling and changed the laws. 2014, here we are, here we go, here we go. 2014, the federal government wanted to impose Senate elections and term limits without provincial consent. The Supreme Court said no, so the government honoured the ruling. 2015. Here we go. The federal government said assisted dying should remain illegal. The Supreme Court said a blanket ban was unconstitutional, so the government honored the ruling and changed the laws. You know what? This video is a stupid idea.
Free trade can be wonderful if you have smart people, but we have people that are stupid.