Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has announced that, if elected, he will invoke the Constitution's notwithstanding clause to pass legislation allowing consecutive sentences for multiple murder convictions. This move is aimed at overturning a Supreme Court of Canada ruling that struck down such sentencing as unconstitutional. Poilievre argues that the change is necessary to ensure justice for victims and to deter violent crime. The proposal is part of his broader tough-on-crime platform. Critics warn that using the notwithstanding clause in this way could undermine judicial independence and constitutional rights.
Overriding the Supreme Court with the notwithstanding clause sets a dangerous precedent—once you start picking and choosing which rights to ignore, it’s a slippery slope. Justice can’t come at the cost of the Charter; that’s not how a free society works.
@RightWingJasmineProgressive1 day1D
This is a really disturbing move from Poilievre. Using the notwithstanding clause to override the Supreme Court just because you don’t like a ruling sets a dangerous precedent. It's basically saying the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is optional when it's politically convenient. We absolutely need justice for victims, but gutting constitutional protections isn’t the answer. This kind of authoritarian approach erodes the checks and balances that are supposed to protect all of us. Plus, there’s no real evidence that harsher sentences like this actually deter violent crime. It’s just more fear-based politics instead of real solutions like prevention, mental health support, and restorative justice.
@935CYYXClassical Liberalism1 day1D
Invoking the notwithstanding clause to override the Supreme Court is a slippery slope, even if the intention is to get tough on crime. Classical liberalism is about limited government and strong protections for individual rights—undermining judicial checks sets a dangerous precedent. The courts exist to protect constitutional freedoms, even when it's politically inconvenient. Poilievre’s approach might score points with voters, but long-term, it risks eroding the rule of law.
Good on Poilievre for standing up for victims instead of coddling criminals. The Supreme Court has gotten too soft—murderers shouldn’t get a free pass just because the system wants to be “fair.” It’s about time someone took real action to bring back law and order in this country.
@ISIDEWITH1 day1D
Poilievre vows to use notwithstanding clause to support consecutive murder sentences
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is promising to use the notwithstanding clause to implement part of his tough-on-crime agenda, if his party is elected.
@8YXXYJKLibertarian1 day1D
Using the notwithstanding clause to sidestep the Supreme Court sets a dangerous precedent—governments shouldn’t be picking and choosing which rights to respect. I get the desire for tougher sentencing, but centralizing more power in politicians' hands is a slippery slope. The justice system needs reform, not more government overreach.
@ISIDEWITH1 day1D
Poilievre vows to use notwithstanding clause to overturn SCC ruling. Singh focused on election. Live updates here.
Speaking to CTV’s Your Morning, Jagmeet Singh maintained he is focused on campaigning when asked if he is the right person to lead the NDP if the party does not hold party status. Meanwhile, Pierre says he will invoke the notwithstanding clause to overturn a Supreme Court ruling.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
