The Elected and the Appointed

Dennis Baker rails against Canadian constitutional orthodoxy. He refuses to exalt the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He will not genuflect to senior judges and eminent professors, the Charter’s high priests. He enthusiastically bashes what he calls the “legal elite.” Despite these stimulating qualities, Baker’s Not Quite Supreme: The Courts and Coordinate Constitutional Interpretation is unlikely to make it off university reading lists into main street bookstores. It is complex, fond of arcane in-house controversies that concern only a tiny group of legal scholars and full of jargon. It is a pity if that limits readership, because Baker presents an alternative and original constitutional theory, one that is tightly argued, comprehensive and interesting.

Baker’s main point is that interpretation of the Canadian constitution by the judiciary is not necessarily the last word on the subject. The legislative branch can reject what the...