Ultra Vires Volume 23, Issue 5 - February 2022

ULTRAVIRES.CA

FEBRUARY 28, 2022

VOL. 23 ISS. 5

THE INDEPENDENT STUDENT NEWSPAPER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO FACULTY OF LAW

ANUSHAY SHEIKH. CREDIT: MEAZA DAMTE.

Inclusive Excellence? Recent Human Rights Tribunal Application Says Otherwise Anushay Sheikh applies to the HRTO following dispute with U of T Law MEAZA DAMTE (2L) The COVID-19 pandemic has been tough on everyone, but especially for folks living with disabilities. Institutions have been struggling to strike the right balance between online and in-person options in the face of unpredictable lockdowns and unique individualized circumstances. Some institutions in making these decisions have been more sensitive than others to the needs of people living with disabilities. For example, at Osgoode Hall Law School, “all students [are to] be entitled to access to all successful recordings for lecture courses in which they are enrolled.” The University of Toronto Faculty of Law seems to have struck the wrong balance, at least for Anushay Sheikh (she/ they).

U of T Law allegedly has been particularly hostile to Sheikh, a disabled person of colour.

Sheikh, who was admitted to the law school’s 2021-2022 entering JD class before finishing her undergraduate degree at McGill University, decided to defer her acceptance to fall 2022

to complete her studies. This deferral stipulated that she could not apply to any other law school in the world during 2021-2022. At that time, she was thrilled about being accepted to the number one law school in Canada, and had no problem signing the agreement. She had no idea the magnitude of the challenges she would end up facing in her pursuit of a legal education.

Sheikh is no stranger to fighting for her right to receive appropriate accommodations for her disabilities. Due to these conditions, “on some days [she] cannot leave the house—either because of a chronic pain flare-up or a flare-up related to anxiety and PTSD.” Sheikh emphasized that she only required accommodations occasionally; she was not asking to learn entirely online. So, where did it all go wrong?

Through a look at the human rights claim and in a conversation with Sheikh, I share the series of events that led Sheikh to file an application with the Human Rights Tribunal of On-

tario (HRTO).

Timeline of Events Communication between U of T Law administration, Accessibility Services, and Sheikh were almost constant during Fall of 2021. This is merely a brief overview of the events that transpired.

May 2021: Sheikh reached out to Terry Gardiner, then Student Mental Health and Wellness Program Manager at the Faculty, to begin the accommodations process. Sheikh told Gardiner that she wanted to begin the process well in advance of starting 1L in late August 2021 because of difficulties she previously faced in obtaining accommodations at McGill. Gardiner directed her to Accessibility Services.

This initiated back and forth communications between Accessibility Services and U of T Law administration, which ultimately led Sheikh to sign a retroactive deferral agreement at the end of the Fall 2021 semester.

August 2021: Sheikh contacted Accessibility Services to communicate that she was having difficulties securing the required documentation. The pandemic has made access to medical care difficult, and the doctor’s offices that Sheikh needed documentation from were experiencing extreme delays. Although she already had documentation from her time at McGill, Accessibility Services needed new paperwork to be completed.

As the start of the semester drew closer, Sheikh contacted Cheryl White, Student Mental Health and Wellness Program Manager.

White told Sheikh there is a “strong preference” for a “Certificate of Disability”—the form required by Accessibility Services. White recommended Sheikh reach back out to Accessibility Services, which she did. Enter Annicka Stabenow, Accessibility Advisor.

Stabenow provided note-taking services and a one-week extension for assignments. Sheikh was also given until December 31, 2021 to subContinued on page 10

ALSO IN THIS ISSUE A JOURNEY INSIDE THE FACULTY OF LAW’S BUDGET PAGE 8

RIGHTS REVIEW PAGE 16

U OF T LAW’S CONFESSION COLUMN PAGE 22

2 | February 28, 2022

ultravires.ca

UV INDEX NEWS 84 Queen’s Park Crescent Toronto, ON M5S 2C5 Ultra Vires is the independent student newspaper of the University of Toronto Faculty of Law. We provide a forum for diverse viewpoints on topics of interest to our readers. We aim to foster dialogue on academic and social issues between students, the faculty, and the broader legal community in Toronto, Ontario, and Canada. Our content does not necessarily reflect the views of the Editorial Board. We print six issues per year. Ultra Vires is printed by Master Web Inc. EDITORS-IN-CHIEF Sabrina Macklai & Annecy Pang BUSINESS MANAGER Griff in Murphy NEWS EDITOR Tom Russell ASSOCIATE NEWS EDITORS Nicolas Williams & Aliya Hemani

A Back to School Lunch Box Recipe

14

Ryan’s Movie Corner

14

Access to Justice and Community Legal Clinics

15

A Tiptoe Away from Zoom University

3

Student Groups Call for Safer Learning at the Faculty

3

The SLS Plays Cupid with Valentine’s Student Match Up

4

Law Ball is Back

4

Student Concerns At the Top of Faculty Council’s Agenda

5

An Impromptu Caffeine Fix

5

OPINIONS

Faculty Announces Change to Exam Policy

6

Why You Should Consider Running for the SLS

On the Rule of Justice

6

JLSA Commemorated International Holocaust Remembrance Day

7

Where’s the Ethics and Professionalism in the 1L Ethics 18 and Professionalism Training?

Anti-Semitism Working Group Report Reccommendations Adopted by U of T

7

University of Toronto to Centralize Management of Legal Resources

7

FEATURES

RIGHTS REVIEW Indigenous Fishing Rights and International Human Rights Law

16

The Implications of Facial Recognition Technology

17

17

Standardizing the 1L Curriculum

18

Shading in the Supreme Court

19

The Accidental Utility of Vaccine Skepticism

19

Words v Actions: The Case of Mental Health at U of T Law

20

Should I Work in Law School?

20

How to Manage Relationships in Law School

21 21

Inclusive Excellence? Recent Human Rights Tribunal Application Says Otherwise

1

Reflections on Fostering a Dog

FEATURES EDITORS Natasha Burman & Rebecca Rosenberg

A Journey Inside the Faculty of Law’s Budget

8

DIVERSIONS

Looking Back on a History of Divestment

9

Pick Up Lines for Your Law School Crush

22

ASSOCIATE FEATURES EDITORS Jeffrey Liu & Hye-seon Jung

Asian Law Students of Canada Virtually Celebrate Lunar New Year

10

Law Love Poetry

22

Finding a Partner in Life and Law

11

U of T Law’s Confession Column

22

The Pros and Cons of Dating a Law Student

11

Introduction to Oral (Hygiene) Advocacy

23

Treat Yo’ Self

12

Intra Vires

23

Wines for Any Relationship Status

13

Ultra Vires Presents: Spring is in the Air

23

The Ultra Vires Crossword

24

OPINIONS EDITOR Mithushan Kirubananthan ASSOCIATE OPINIONS EDITORS Vivienne Stern & Stephen Mapplebeck DIVERSIONS EDITOR Harry Myles ASSOCIATE DIVERSIONS EDITOR Fievel Lim RECRUIT EDITOR Angela Feng RECRUIT REPORTER Hussein E. E. Fawzy EDITOR AT LARGE Shae Rothery PRODUCTION COORDINATOR Jennifer Sun PHOTOGRAPHERS Jacqueline Huang, Shae Rothery, & Thomas Alexander COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR Jasveen Singh SOCIAL MEDIA COORDINATORS Kaitlyn Nelson & Elaine Cheng LAYOUT EDITOR Alexandra Fox

ADVERTISING If you are interested in advertising, please email us at business@ultravires.ca ERRORS If you notice any errors, please email us at editor@ultravires.ca.

SUBMISSIONS If you would like to submit a tip, letter, or an article, please email us at editor@ultravires.ca.

Ultra Vires reserves the right to edit submissions.

EDITORS' NOTE Can you believe that this is our penultimate issue of U V for the 2021-2022 year? Oh, how time f lies! We hope you all had a restful reading week and are enjoy ing the slight ly warmer temperatures.

Br ighter days are ahead.

In this lovey-dovey issue of U V, you’ll f ind the pros and cons of dating a law student, rev iews of sweet (and savour y) treats, and anonymous confessions. For the cynics—and there are many, we are law students after all—we also have an article about w ines for any relationship status. Not your cup of tea? We also explore the Facult y’s amended accessibilit y policies, a student’s human r ights claim against the Facult y, and issues w ith the Facult y’s approach to students’ mental health.

If you haven’t gotten involved in U V yet, you still have time! Shoot us an email at editor@ultrav ires.ca and we’d be happy to chat and get your ideas into our last (!) issue of the year. A s a reminder, we welcome wr itten and v isual submissions from anyone in the legal communit y.

Good luck w ith the home stretch, U of T Law! Sabrina Macklai & Annecy Pang Co-Editors-in-Chief, Ultra Vires Vol 23

ARE YOU READY FOR

THE BAR EXAMS?

DON’T PANIc. Prepare with Emond’s Bar Exam Preparation Manual.

Download it for free at

bit.ly/F22-EmondBarPrep

save 10% on Preparation Courses.

Online and live-webinar classes this fall in Toronto. Register at bit.ly/F22-EmondBarPrep and use discount code 10UofT22 Online classes are available year-round. Promotion ends January 30, 2023 at 11:59 p.m.

TEST YOURSELF WITH ONLINE PRACTICE EXAMS Full-length practice exams with realistic questions & a timer

Detailed answer explanations & performance review

Continuous access from purchase until next exam date

bit.ly/F22-EmondBarPrep Emond Exam Prep • 1 Eglinton Ave E, Suite 600, Toronto ON emondexamprep.ca • emondexamprep@emond.ca • 1-888-837-0815

NEWS

ultravires.ca

February 28, 2022 | 3

A Tiptoe Away from Zoom University U of T Law students fully return to in-person learning on February 28 NICOLAS WILLIAMS (1L)

OUTSIDE THE LAW SCHOOL. CREDIT: JACQUELINE HUANG.

With COVID-19 conditions improving across the province, U of T Law students began returning to the halls of the Jackman Law Building on February 7 for hybrid instruction. Despite this change, most classrooms remained empty in the two weeks between February 7 and the start of the law school’s reading break given many professors’ decision to remain online.

In Dean Jutta Brunnée’s e-mail from January 19 announcing the shift to in-person learning, all faculty and students were given the opportunity to choose to teach and participate in classes remotely from February 7 to February 28. Assistant Dean Academic Sara Faherty confirmed that this decision depended on the preferences of individual faculty members who were asked to work out an arrangement with their individual classes.

The approach taken by faculty members varied from class to class. While some conducted student polls, others made the decision on their own. The proximity of February 7 to reading break also played a role. It was noted in conversations about the return to in-person classes that it would make more sense to undergo the transition after reading break. While the law school did not collect specific data on the proportion of classes that returned to in-person, Assistant Dean Faherty shared that it was her “personal observation that very few classes seem[ed] to go in-person.”

By contrast, as students return from reading break, Assistant Dean Faherty said that “Faculty

and students are getting the same message: the Faculty of Law is returning to in-person classes on February 28.” A small number of individualized exceptions may be granted based on relevant personal circumstances, health, and other considerations.

Given the different pandemic conditions under which students are returning to in-person classes compared to the fall, some students have expressed concern that the flexibility offered by the school has not changed.

On February 15, Associate Dean Christopher Essert announced a number of changes to Faculty policies that address some of these concerns. First, on a trial basis, individual instructors will be allowed to record their lectures. How these recordings are distributed is the decision of each individual professor, and more information will likely be made available to individual classes. This marks a significant change from the longstanding policy of not allowing any recording. Second, the Faculty will provide each student with one pack of five KN95 masks at the Security Kiosk inside Flavelle House from February 28 to March 4 between 9:00 am and 4:00 pm.

The policy around access to lectures via Zoom implemented in the Fall of 2021 will remain in place.

Students will still be granted Zoom access to their classes if they receive a Red-Screen from UCheck or where unforeseen non-COVID-19 related circumstances prevent them from attending class.

Student Groups Call for Safer Learning at the Faculty DLSA and UTLU demand equitable, flexible, and safe education for all ANNECY PANG (3L) On February 2, the University of Toronto Law Union (UTLU) penned a letter to Dean Jutta Brunnée stating that the Faculty’s COVID-19 policies fail to take into account the needs of its most vulnerable students. In the letter, the UTLU wrote that “the Faculty’s decision to require inperson learning in the middle of an ongoing health crisis [...] speaks to how ‘returning to normalcy’ for some students is prioritised over the lives of disabled and immunocompromised law students and vulnerable community members.” The UTLU listed three calls to action for the Faculty: increasing access to accommodations and improving remote learning, improving transparency around re-opening and closure decisions, and making inperson learning safer for all.

The Disabled Law Students’ Association (DLSA) endorsed the UTLU’s requests for action in its own letter to Dean Brunnée on February 3. The DLSA emphasised that students should have access to remote learning accommodations for reasons beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. It noted that despite the Faculty demonstrating that it has the infrastructure and resources to provide remote access to classes, “it is deeply concerning that the administration continuously chooses to deny students with disabilities this accommodation.”

The DLSA and UTLU also wrote an open letter calling for safer learning at the Faculty. The

open letter reiterated the UTLU’s original calls to action. As of publication, the letter has 123 student signatures and 13 signatories from various clubs and organisations.

In a joint comment to Ultra Vires, the DLSA and UTLU wrote that “the current model of individual accommodations requires vulnerable and disabled students students to expend extra labour to keep themselves safe.” They explained that many disabled students feel defeated by the Faculty’s accommodation bodies and have lost trust in them since students have been denied accommodations, either by Accessibility Services or by the Accommodations Committee at the Faculty.

The Students’ Law Society (SLS) echoed the calls to action in an email to students on February 15. The SLS had been advocating for the Faculty to allow for students with health, commute, caregiving, or childminding concerns to receive remote accommodations simply by contacting the Accommodations Committee.

“While our recent advocacy efforts have not touched on all the issues raised in the petition, we have been discussing access to Zoom links, the quality of audio, and improved and proactive communications over the course of the year (including last summer), and have been asking about the provision of masks as well,” commented SLS President Willem Crispin-Frei (3L).

The DLSA and UTLU’s concerns are shared by students at McGill University Faculty of Law and Osgoode Hall Law School. Students at McGill Law voted to go on strike beginning January 31 to demand ongoing and equitable options for course delivery that accommodate participants joining remotely. The strike ended on February 6 when demands for hybrid and alternative methods of course delivery were met in all targeted classes. At Osgoode, a collective of students wrote an open letter to the school administration demanding “a learning model that prioritizes and centres the diverse needs of disabled, mature, racialized, and low-income students who have been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic.”

On February 15, Associate Dean Christopher Essert advised students via email that individual professors are permitted to record and distribute their lectures to students. The Faculty will also provide lecture recordings to individual students in the context of ongoing or occasional accommodations. Previously, the Faculty had a blanket prohibition against lecture recordings.

In the same email, Associate Dean Essert announced that students may occasionally receive Zoom access to classes for non-COVID-19-related unforeseen events. Associate Dean Essert also stated that the Faculty secured a supply of KN95 masks; students may collect a package of five

masks during the week of February 28.

Crispin-Frei indicated that the SLS has contacted Associate Dean Essert to clarify what “unforeseen” means. “The Faculty has repeatedly expressed that any remote links must go through the Accommodations Committee. In essence, this is the same process as the Fall [semester],” he added. The SLS is pushing for a different approach in which any accommodation process would involve a default grant of remote access, based on a short explanation and without need for documentation.

“Of all our requests, the administration has only promised KN95s. [...] All of our other requests remain unaddressed,” commented the DLSA and UTLU. They also seek further clarification that students will have access to more than five masks for the remainder of the school year.

In response to a request for comment from UV, Dean Brunnée referred to Associate Dean Essert’s email. “We’re always grateful for input from students, and we are in communication with the UTLU and DLSA,” she added.

The DLSA has arranged a meeting with Dean Brunnée to discuss accommodations and ableism at the Faculty, although this meeting was offered prior to the DLSA’s February 3 email. Dean Brunnée has offered to meet with the UTLU following reading week.

NEWS

4 | February 28, 2022

ultravires.ca

The SLS Plays Cupid with Valentine’s Student Match Up It’s like Cognomos, but for love SABRINA MACKLAI (2L JD/MI) Ah, Valentine’s Day. For some, it’s a day filled with chocolate, red wine, and cuddles. For others, it’s a promise of half-priced chocolate come February 15, liquor a bit (or a lot) stronger than wine, and a day of self care (i.e., no opening your constitutional law textbook). No matter how you celebrated Valentine’s Day, the Students’ Law Society (SLS) wanted to make sure everyone felt the love this year.

For the first time, the SLS ran the Valentine’s Student Match Up. By February 4, students filled out a questionnaire run by Matchomatics, an external fundraising company. Matchomatics then generated a list of 27 students they were most compatible with in their year and other years that was distributed on February 14. They also provided students with their top five most opposite matches and mystery matches.

157 students participated in the event, including myself. Sana Najafi (2L) was my number one compatible match, while I was only fourth on her list (heartbreaking, I know). When asked why she participated in the event, Najafi stated, “I did a Match-o-matic quiz back in high school and it felt nostalgic to do it again. It’s exciting to see who you match with that is already a friend, and who you get that is not a friend (yet) but seemingly compatible.”

According to 2L Social and Finance Committee (SFC) representative Apollonia Mastrogiacomo, a member of SFC’s Valentine’s Day subcommittee, “The idea came out of brainstorming for a fun event that could be done virtually and did not require students to put in any more screen time.”

She noted that most questions were already chosen by Matchomatics but, where possible, the

Committee tried to pick questions that would be relevant to law students, keeping them “funny and lighthearted.” The questions ranged from asking students their height to where they would be if not in law school (the classic struggle between doing nothing as a trust fund baby and working tirelessly to pay off your undergraduate debt).

Mastrogiacomo emphasized that the initiative was meant to be a fun Valentine’s day-themed, community-building event as opposed to exclusively matching romantic partners. To achieve this goal, she noted that the questionnaire specifically did not ask questions about gender or sexual orientation and that the friendship aspect was emphasized in the SLS’ marketing.

“The goal of this event was to allow students to find out which of their friends and classmates they are most compatible with personality or interest-

wise and to provide the opportunity for students to hopefully learn more about [or] potentially connect with classmates they had never met,” stated Mastrogiacomo.

In that regard, it seems like the event was a success despite most matches potentially knowing each other beforehand. Najafi commented that, “I’ve interacted with most of my matches to some extent already and they are all cool and chill. Now I have a good ice breaker to strengthen those relationships.”

If not for this initiative (and this article), I likely would not have reconnected with some classmates that made my list (or learned that I am “cool and chill”). Overall, for a low-stakes, low-budget event during pandemic times, the SLS Valentines Student Match Up was a great success that will hopefully continue in the future.

Law Ball is Back

SLS announces return of the biggest event on the law school social calendar NATASHA BURMAN (2L) AND NICHOLAS WILLIAMS (1L) Before the pandemic, hundreds of U of T Law students eagerly awaited the most extravagant night of dinner, drinking, and dancing: the annual law ball. The law ball is touted to be the highlight of a law student’s social calendar, where students of all years, as well as some professors, gather at a venue in Toronto for an unforgettable night in formal attire. The night is purely for celebration—students take a night to rejoice with their friends and classmates outside of the lecture-hall setting and commemorate the end of another rigorous academic year.

The Students’ Law Society (SLS) Social and Finance Committee announced earlier this month that the hotly-anticipated law ball will return this year, after being canceled for the past two years due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The date is set for April 1, subject to Ontario’s public health restrictions being lifted as expected. This year, the law ball is proposed to be held at The Eglinton Grand, an event venue and theatre which has housed many law balls in the past.

Per the Ontario Reopening Roadmap, there should not be any capacity restrictions in place by the time of the event. However, should the restrictions return, SLS President Willem CrispinFrei (3L) shared that the SLS has plans to sell tickets in three blocks based on time of purchase so that capacity restrictions can be followed. If capacity is not lowered, Crispin-Frei stated that all 1Ls and upper year students should have the opportunity to attend.

This is an especially exciting time for 3L students. When schools closed across the province for the first time in 2020, law students reluctantly put their already-purchased law ball attire on hold, anticipating the event’s return. If all goes to plan, 3L students this year, who were 1Ls when the pandemic started, will be attending their first law ball. Vivian Cheng (3L), in a comment to UV, expressed her excitement when reading SLS’s law ball announcement: “Given the numerous lockdowns we’ve had throughout my

CREDIT: EGLINTON GRAND

time in law school, I really didn’t think we would have a law ball. I’m excited to dress up, eat good food, and see people.” Even though she has been looking forward to attending a law ball since 1L, Cheng hopes that safety precautions will be maintained.

Tickets will begin to go on sale during the week of February 28. Crispin-Frei shared that there will be a brief advance sale for 3L students to ensure that all 3Ls, and potentially graduating students, have an opportunity to attend. After

this, tickets will be made available to 2Ls and 1Ls, with any remaining tickets available for guests. The ticket price will include hors d’oeuvres, two late night food stations, and an open bar. This has been common for law balls in the past, with snacks being served throughout the night to complement the open bar.

Reflecting on the return of this event after two years, Crispin-Frei shared that he is “most looking forward to our students having a chance to reconnect and participate in a traditional law

school event.” SLS Vice President Social Thryn Irwin (3L) echoed this sentiment, stating that the SLS is looking forward to an opportunity to “give the graduating students a chance to say goodbye and give other students a chance to bond together and meet new friends.”

More information regarding the theme, ticket sales, pricing, timing, guests, capacity limits, public health measures, and the menu will be released by the SLS via email before the end of reading week.

ultravires.ca

NEWS

February 28, 2022 | 5

Student Concerns At the Top of Faculty Council’s Agenda Lecture recordings, accommodations, and Dean’s Committee updates among important topics discussed MEAZA DAMTE (2L) The February 9 Faculty Council was eventful to say the least. Dean Jutta Brunnée began by clarifying the administration’s policies on recorded lectures, accommodations for virtual learning, and the provision of KN95 masks. During the Chair’s Welcome, Dean Brunnée responded to requests made by the Students’ Law Society (SLS) to clarify the off icial Faculty recording policy. Dean Brunnée recognized and aff irmed the right of individual instructors to decide for themselves whether they record their lectures but warned that recordings will not supplant mandatory attendance. Video and audio recordings will be made available through the law school’s accommodations committee.

The Dean foreshadowed a revised recording policy in her opening remarks that was subsequently released via email by Associate Dean Christopher Essert on February 15.

After reading week, the Faculty intends to return to in-person learning “to the fullest extent possible.” According to Dean Brunnée, “we are not out of the woods yet, but are heading very much in the right direction.”

Students can expect a format similar to what was implemented in Fall 2021, with some courses being taught online at the discretion of the instructor. The “red screen accommodation” process will continue to operate.

Upon the return of in-person instruction, the Faculty will make KN95 masks available to students who want them. Information on how to access these masks was subsequently communicated in Associate Dean Essert’s February 15 email.

Anonymous attendees expressed concerns about the accommodation process at the Faculty and detailed their negative experiences during the Fall 2021 semester. Dean Brunnée reiterated that as decisions are being made, the administration is mindful of the array of

circumstances that students may f ind themselves in and are working to provide remote access through the accommodations committee. Professor Trudo Lemmens expressed his support for students seeking accommodations and urged the Faculty to be liberal in providing accommodations on an individualized basis. Prof. Lemmens offered his own experience requesting accommodations to teach online due to his hearing disability as a reminder to the Faculty that individualized circumstances can and do occur. Ultimately, “students who feel their circumstances require remote access should approach the accommodations committee,” said Prof. Lemmens.

SLS President Willem Crispin-Frei (3L) addressed some of these policy changes in his Presidential remarks. He articulated four primary issues facing students and the associated policy decisions he hoped to see the Faculty adopt: clear enunciation of the lecture recording policy, access to digital notes during open book exams, no camera-on policies, and liberal accommodations for students who have challenges not directly related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Crispin-Frei stated that he was glad to see that work is already underway on these issues and congratulated students for completing what was certainly a diff icult January.

As of February 16, the Faculty has acquiesced to three out of four student demands in a series of emails from Associate Dean Essert. The status of mandatory camera-on policies instituted by some instructors (Professors Catherine Valcke and Brian Langille, in particular) remains uncertain. According to Crispin-Frei, the SLS remains hopeful that further changes will occur over the coming weeks.

Graduate Law Student Association Presi-

dent Sara Maadanisani informed Faculty Council that while COVID-19 restrictions derailed the graduate student social, an online social event is in the works. Maadanisani also thanked the Faculty for returning to in-person instruction and commended them for diversifying the work streams available for graduate students.

Multiple Dean’s Committees provided interim reports. The Curriculum Committee interim report, provided by Associate Dean Essert, proposed sessional dates for approval.

There was some discussion about the shortened period for f irst year exams but the Faculty assured student representatives that f irst year classes will be constructed in a manner where no 1Ls will be prejudiced.

A mandatory course on Indigenous issues in the Canadian legal system is on track to be implemented next year. There are currently seven broad topics being considered, but Associate Dean Essert emphasized that the selection will be up to individual instructors.

As it stands, there are two proposals to f it this course into the law school curriculum: either it will replace the Legal Process course in the 1L curriculum or it will be worked in as a mandatory upper year course. Moving forward, the committee hopes to consult a variety of stakeholder groups.

Associate Dean Essert also provided the Revision Commmittee’s interim report. A working document summarizing the governance documents from multiple sources is newly completed. Essert congratulated Branden Cave, 3L Student Life and Academic representative, for doing most of the work on the summarization. The goal of this document review was to clarify the relationships between administration and Faculty Council, the Faculty Council and academic freedom, and the Faculty Council and the imple-

mentation of administrative decisions. The Committee hopes that their f inal report will provide next year’s Committee members the relevant information to engage in the normative process of envisioning what Faculty Council’s Constitution ought to look like.

Professor Douglas Sanderson provided the Truth and Reconciliation Committee’s interim report, emphasizing the importance of a historical account that encompasses social, legal, and political elements to help students situate Indigenous claims in the present day. Three free online programs have become available in the last year in addition to the University of Alberta’s “Indigenous Canada” online course. All other courses require payment. The Committee has considered the relationship between the new mandatory Indigenous law course and other JD courses, graduate students, and the broader community. When asked their views about inevitable overlap between the mandatory course and other 1L courses, student representatives unanimously agreed that “overlap is okay, but there needs to be an effort to coordinate between Faculty members.”

This statement led to a discussion on an issue that is front of mind for many students: whether professors teaching the same course talk to each other. According to Prof. Sanderson, there was a time that instructors in different doctrinal areas would meet roundtable-style to coordinate. This practice has since fallen to the wayside; currently, there is no off icial forum for communication between instructors on course content and delivery. Conversations do happen, albeit informally, but Prof. Sanderson emphasized the importance of formal coordination at least for the mandatory Indigenous law course.

An Impromptu Caffeine Fix Goodmans LLP Café remains closed while the Faculty arranges biweekly free coffee kiosks NICOLAS WILLIAMS (1L) Since U of T Law students returned to inperson classes in August, the smell of coffee has been missing from the Atrium. The Goodmans LLP Café has remained closed throughout the entire academic year. As some students returned to campus in February, it was announced that the café will remain closed for the rest of the year.

The continued closure of the café has remained a mystery, and it is not alone. Of the 46 locations to eat on campus, only eight

opened during the fall semester. According to the U of T Food Services website, 23 locations are now open, though many other faculty-specif ic cafés remain closed. U of T Food Services could not be reached for comment.

Without the café at the law school, students are forced to make the frequent trek to off-campus options like Starbucks and Tim Hortons. Only 3Ls can remember the café’s convenience as an accessible option. An

anonymous 3L student even stated that they were discouraged from spending time at the law school because of the lack of dining options to help get through long study sessions.

Fortunately, the U of T Law services team has stepped in with an alternative option.

Following the success of the coffee program in December, Associate Dean Christopher Essert announced by e-mail that the program will return on March 1 for the remainder of the term. On Tuesdays and Wednes-

days from 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, kiosks in the Atrium and on level 1 of Jackman Hall will offer free coffee and snacks for students. Associate Dean Essert noted that, as in the fall examination period, this program was made possible by the hard work of the U of T Law Facilities team.

While U of T Law students must wait until the fall for a reliable source for their caffeine f ix, there will at least be some new options available after the law school’s reading break.

6 | February 28, 2022

NEWS

ultravires.ca

Faculty Announces Change to Exam Policy Students may now access digital materials during fully open book exams ANNECY PANG (3L) On February 16, Associate Dean Christopher Essert announced that starting in the upcoming Winter 2022 examination period, students may refer to electronic materials during their open book exams. Students will be permitted access to documents such as electronic summaries that are saved on their hard drives, but they remain unable to access the internet. The adjusted policy applies to fully open book exams in which professors allow students to refer to any material they wish.

The Faculty’s historical policy only allowed access to printed notes during exams. However, when examinations were conducted remotely due to the COVID-19 pandemic, students were permitted access to their computer files and the internet.

Last semester, as the Faculty moved back to inperson examinations, Yiwei Jin (2L) spearheaded a petition to allow students access to their com-

puter files during examinations, citing the financial and environmental consequences of the historical policy. Although 148 students signed the petition, the Faculty decided against changing the policy, citing concerns with academic dishonesty and technology licensing agreements.

In a statement to UV, Associate Dean Essert stated that the Faculty wished to properly weigh different considerations, which explains the lengthy process. “[W]e were able to work with the software vendor [...] to ensure that sufficient protections to address the important academic integrity considerations could be in place,” he added. The Faculty also consulted with faculty members about their preferences before amending the policy.

The Students’ Law Society (SLS) has advocated for this policy change throughout the year.

“Since October, the [Student Life and Academic Committee (SLAC)] executive has raised this is-

sue at nearly every meeting with the administration,” commented SLS Vice-President Academic Eloise Hirst (2L). “In the Fall, we were informed that the Faculty had purchased a subscription to Examplify that would not allow for hard drive access in exams while disabling internet access.

It was for this reason, we were told, that hard drive access would be disabled for all exams.”

When SLAC investigated the software’s functionality and suggested that the Faculty should be able to disallow internet access while retaining hard drive access, the Faculty advised it was not possible to upgrade the subscription.

In January, SLAC drafted several motions for Faculty Council’s consideration—a novel move due to the uncertainty around Faculty Council’s jurisdiction. Among these motions was one permitting instructors to record lectures, and another that would enable hard drive access during open-book exams. “Before the [February 9] Fac-

ulty Council meeting, [we] met with Dean Brunnée and Associate Dean Essert to discuss the proposed motions,” said Hirst. “We were informed that the Faculty had been considering these policies, but that these motions expedited the process, such that changes would be announced in mid- to late-February.” SLAC decided not to bring forward the motions at that meeting.

“After these efforts, the SLS is delighted to see these changes to the Faculty’s long standing policies that have been a source of student frustration for many years,” concluded Hirst.

“The policy change is good and long overdue,” commented Jin. “It’s clear that various advocacy efforts, including the petition, forced the administration to confront and come to terms with its policy’s effects on students.” He hopes that this change makes students more inclined to collective action in the future.

On the Rule of Justice

Former Supreme Court Justice Abella talks changing the court, judicial activism, and the rule of law at the 2022 Coxford Lecture SABRINA MACKLAI (2L JD/MI) On February 9, former Supreme Court Justice Rosalie Silberman Abella delivered the twelfth annual Coxford Lecture, attracting its largest audience to date.

The Coxford Lecture is an annual public lecture on the rule of law hosted by Western Law. Past speakers include former Supreme Court Justice Ian Binnie, the 28th Governor General of Canada the Right Honourable David Johnston, prominent philosopher Jeremy Waldron, among others. The lecture series aims to promote and advance the rule of law through discussion of pressing public law issues.

Justice Abella’s lecture was no different. She began her talk by alluding to the Ottawa protests, noting that “ justice is in crisis because more and more people have decided that, like the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland, the law is what they say it is.” Canada appears to be in a state of flux concerning what justice and democracy mean, or even what the law is for.

Addressing her lecture to law students in particular, Justice Abella stated that as “the future of democracy,” students have the responsibility to decide “how fair and respectful this country will be.” No matter what students choose to do with their law degrees, it is Justice Abella’s hope that they will make “ justice [their] transcendent preoccupation.”

While Justice Abella noted that great changes to justice in Canada have occurred since she

graduated from law school in 1970, including official bilingualism and the introduction of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, she criticised the legal system’s slow, incremental changes that do not reflect our modern times.

“Integration based on difference, equality based on inclusion despite difference, and compassion based on respect and fairness.

These are the principles that to me form the moral core of Canada’s national values, the values that make us the most successful practitioners of multiculturalism in the world and the values whose integrity requires the legal profession’s vigilant protection. And yet, are we actually delivering access to justice to the public?”

Referring to this as a fundamental concern, Justice Abella expressed dismay that civil trials are conducted almost exactly the same way as they were in 1906. Whereas other professions like medicine have advanced with the time, the legal system is frequently resistant to change. This resistance has created a public that has little confidence and respect for the judiciary. “Justice may be blind, but the public is not,” remarked Justice Abella. “The public doesn’t think it should take years and several thousands of dollars to decide where their children should live, whether their employer should have fired them, or whether their accident was compensable. They want their day in

court, not their years.”

Rather than focus solely on more traditional access to justice standards like legal aid and pro bono, Justice Abella encouraged law students to think boldly and work towards designing a new way of delivering justice “to ordinary people with ordinary disputes and ordinary bank accounts.” Doing so may be the only way for the public to believe in justice and the legal system.

On the role that judges should have in a democracy, Justice Abella stressed that while judges may see themselves as independent and impartial, that is not necessarily how the public views them. Successful judges, in protecting their own integrity and the Court’s legitimacy, must recognize the diversity of our country and the differing views that may enter the courthouse. “Above all,” Justice Abella notes to protect integrity, “we need to embrace humility and see the world we judge with rigour and compassion from the ground up, and not from our exalted tops down … and there is no legitimacy without integrity.”

When judging the judges, Justice Abella advised that students remember that judicial interpretation involves 1) interpreting imprecise and nuanced language and behaviours and 2) weighing competing values that ever-shift as society progresses. She notes, however, that weighing these values and taking public policy

into account doesn’t necessarily impair judicial neutrality or impartiality. Judges have prior conceptions, opinions, and sensibilities about society’s values; what is key is that these preconceptions do not interfere with their interpretation of the evidence and arguments as presented.

“Judicial activism as we know is only used to presumptively dismiss the legitimacy of a decision that expands rights, not restricts them,” remarked Justice Abella.

Justice Abella also made clear that Courts should not be swayed by public opinion as it is not evidence. Referencing the then-controversial Brown v Board of Education, a US decision that held racial segregation in public schools is unconstitutional, she noted that it is the role of the judiciary to do what is right, not what is necessarily popular.

“Being fearlessly open to understanding how injustice sounds and feels to the vulnerable who come before judges is what judges are for. It is the compassionate application of law to life. Otherwise, what’s the point?”

Finally, Justice Abella stressed the importance of promoting the “universalism of democratic values,” including due process, protection for minorities, a free press, and more, as opposed to “a contested euphemism like the rule of law.” Indeed, what we need is the rule of justice.

ultravires.ca

NEWS

February 28, 2022 | 7

JLSA Commemorated International Holocaust Remembrance Day U of T Law reflects on Holocaust survivors’ stories REBECCA ROSENBERG (2L) On January 27, U of T Law’s Jewish Law Students’ Association ( JLSA) commemorated International Holocaust Remembrance Day with two virtual ceremonies for faculty and students to listen to Holocaust survivors’ stories. The annual remembrance day marks the anniversary of the liberation of Nazi concentration camps and the death of six million Jews and other minorities who were victims of the Holocaust.

Holocaust survivor Howard Chandler, invited

by JLSA Co-President Dahlia Horlick (2L), was the first to share his story. Chandler was born on December 5, 1928 in Wierzbnik-Starachowice, Poland. After being forced into a labour camp at the start of the war, he was sent to Auschwitz in 1944, later ending up at Buchenwald in 1945 until he was liberated. Chandler recounted his time

in the camps and reiterated how important it is for others to hear his story.

Joelle Chandler introduced her grandfather before he began his talk. She remarked how much of an honour it was to see her Zaidy (“grandfather” in Yiddish) share his experience during a time when, in the face of rising AntiSemitism, Holocaust education is needed more than ever. “[My grandfather] is a very experienced speaker,” Joelle stated. “Even so, it is not easy to revisit such horrific memories and speak about them. He does this for the future, for a more humane world. We are unfortunately the last generation of students to be able to hear first-hand testimony from survivors, and we must take these opportunities to listen and to learn so that we can

become witnesses and stand up against hate in all forms.”

JLSA Co-President Julia Gauze (3L) said that Joelle’s introductory remarks highlighted the generational impact imposed by the Holocaust.

Gauze stated that, “Holocaust remembrance is about that legacy and making sure that these survivors’ memories live on.” She also wanted to thank the Jewish Graduate Student Initiative, who helped organize the event.

U of T’s JLSA was further invited to participate in an evening program led by Osgoode’s JLSA, in conjunction with other JLSAs across Ontario. Eva Meisels, born in 1939 in Budapest, Hungary, spoke about her time in the Budapest Ghetto. Meisels eventually found a safe house and, with false papers obtained from Raoul Wal-

lenberg, was able to escape the camps. Her speech was accompanied by commentary from Toronto Mayor John Tory and former Attorney General Professor Irwin Cotler.

Dean Jutta Brunnée, Assistant Dean Brittany Twiss, and many others were in attendance at the ceremonies. According to Gauze, U of T’s JLSA was pleased to see faculty members in attendance alongside students of different backgrounds. “It’s on all of us to remember the Holocaust and to learn lessons from the past so that this never happens again,” she commented.

To learn more about International Holocaust Remembrance Day, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization has a page dedicated to information about the Holocaust and stories from survivors.

Anti-Semitism Working Group Report Recommendations Adopted by U of T An update on the University of Toronto’s response to anti-Semitism TOM RUSSELL (2L) On December 8, 2021, the Anti-Semitism Working Group (ASWG) released its Final Report, including eight recommendations to inform the University of Toronto’s response to anti-Semitism in its various manifestations. The University of Toronto accepted all eight recommendations as a guide to inform the University’s response.

In accordance with its mission, the ASWG developed its report after consulting with members of the University community, examining practices in other institutions, and reviewing the University’s existing policies. In writing this summary of the ASWG recommendations, UV spoke with Professor Arthur Ripstein, chair of the ASWG. Recommendations 1 and 2 focused on ensuring that tackling anti-Semitism fell within the ambit of the existing offices dealing with racism, discrimination, and exclusion. This includes requiring that anti-racism training, education, and outreach campaigns include consideration of anti-Semitism.

Recommendation 3 was perhaps the most controversial in recommending the University not adopt any definitions of anti-Semitism that have recently been proposed. Some Jewish advocacy groups conveyed disappointment, especially at the recommendation not to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition.

On May 16, 2016, the IHRA adopted the following non-legally binding working definition of anti-Semitism: “[Anti-Semitism] is a certain per-

ception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

The IHRA definition has since been adopted in a number of countries. However, scholars and advocates have expressed concerns over the IHRA definition’s capability to equate Judaism with the State of Israel and undermine debate within Jewish communities.

When asked about this matter, Prof. Ripstein stated that recommendation 3 must consider the University’s place in society. The ASWG report noted that the University must be a place in which difficult and controversial questions are discussed, which is inconsistent with the IHRA working definition.

Recommendations 4 and 5 focused on academic freedom and freedom of speech. The report urged the University to issue routine communications about its approach to controversial events. However, the report also urged the University not to regulate the views of individuals or place content-based restrictions on events.

In November 2021, the University of Toronto President Meric Gertler publicly denounced two Scarborough Campus Student Union’s motions that promoted boycotting, divestments, and economic sanctions against Israel. When asked whether the University’s response represented an example of the University balancing its commitment to academic freedom and its commitment

to inclusion in a manner envisioned by the ASWG recommendations, Professor Ripstein had this to say: The [University’s Response] reflects the proper consideration of both academic freedom and inclusion, although I would not describe it as a matter of balancing them at all. I think that issues of academic freedom and inclusion are fully aligned in this case, as reflected in the statement.

As the ASWG report emphasizes, academic freedom is fundamentally an individual right, as is freedom of speech. Inclusion is also an individual right to be able to participate fully in the life of the University. It is inconsistent with both freedom of speech and inclusion to impose political tests on participation in ordinary aspects of campus life, or to impose such tests on access to funding or participation in elected student government.

Student governments are autonomous organizations whose membership is determined by students’ registration, and that collect mandatory fees from those members.

They are required to operate in a democratic manner, which means that they must allow individual members to decide for themselves what positions, if any, to take on controversial social and political issues. They therefore cannot make participation in their structure, or access to the funds that they have been entrusted to disperse, conditional on taking the positions held by their governing bodies or the majority of their members.

Imposing such political tests or conditions is inconsistent with both freedom of expression (because it is literally compelled speech) and inclusion. As the President’s response notes, many people were understandably concerned about the way in which the SCSU resolutions singled out Israel. But they would have been no more acceptable if they had been accompanied by additional motions requiring students to take positions on one or more other conflicts.

Recommendation 6 urged the University to develop measures to respond to various forms of social exclusion, harassment, microaggressions, and bullying. This includes a strategy to deal with online instances of these events.

Recommendations 7 and 8 encouraged the University to improve accommodations for Jewish individuals. This included ensuring that kosher food is readily available on campus and that the University’s policy on the scheduling of classes and examinations in relation to religious observances is applied consistently.

Since accepting the ASWG recommendations, the University has handed over the implementation of the recommendations to the University administration.

The University administration has stated its intention to communicate its progress on these recommendations via the Commitments Dashboard website currently being used to track progress on the recommendations outlined in the Anti-Black Racism Task Force Report.

University of Toronto to Centralize Management of Legal Resources Newly-created Office of University Counsel set to manage internal and external legal resources TOM RUSSELL (2L) On April 16, 2021, University of Toronto President Meric Gertler announced that a new University Counsel & Chief Legal Off icer would soon be appointed and tasked with establishing a central off ice to provide University legal services. This central off ice has been rationalized as a response to the growing complexity and scale of University business, which depends on both internal and

external legal resources.

On July 30, 2021, Kristin Taylor was selected as the new University Counsel and Chief Legal Off icer. Taylor previously served as General Counsel and Vice-president, Chief Legal and Risk Off icer at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH). Before working at CAMH, Taylor was a partner in the Health Law Group at Borden Ladner

Gervais LLP. Since beginning her practice in 2001, Taylor has been named one of Lexpert’s Rising Stars under 40 in 2011 and was nominated as one of Canadian Lawyer’s Most Inf luential Lawyers in 2014.

On January 28, 2022, Taylor announced the creation of the Office of University Counsel (OUC), which will act as the central office to manage internal and external legal resources

at the University. All practicing lawyers across the University are now to report to the OUC, while some will remain embedded within their own specialized division. In this announcement, Taylor stated that the OUC will be launching a website in the coming months that will provide further information about the new structure for legal services at the University and upcoming OUC initiatives.

FEATURES

8 | February 28, 2022

ultravires.ca

A Journey Inside the Faculty of Law’s Budget A seven-month investigation into expenses, budgets, and where all the money actually goes HARRY MYLES (2L) I began researching this article in July 2021. The initial pitch was quite basic: where did the money for in-person activities at the Faculty, like catered lunches, go once we switched to online in October 2020? Is the school saving money on building upkeep since no one is using the spaces? How much does hand sanitizer and IT support cost? And what about the 2020 1L orientation (O-Week) expenses?

A rumour was circulating that the 2020 O-Week ran a considerable surplus, leaving some to question as to where that extra money went. I decided to investigate these questions and separate fact from fiction. Unfortunately, this investigation came up short and left more questions than answers. Access to budgets and expenses at the Faculty, and the University of Toronto as a whole, is a tightly held secret unavailable to mere students, despite the tens of thousands of dollars we pay every year to attend school. The purpose of this article was to answer some of the questions above, but more generally understand how the huge sums of money contained in university budgets is spent.

I cast the net wide and contacted various levels of the Faculty and University administration to uncover the details and I was stonewalled across the board. As the investigation progressed, I came across more issues I wanted to address which led to further questions going unanswered.

O-Week First, to address the O-Week rumours, I initially reached out to the 2020 student coordinators, Thryn Irwin (3L) and Branden Cave (3L). I was directed to Assistant Dean, JD Program, Alexis Archbold (as she then was prior to her secondment in September 2021) and Ann Vuletin, the Student Programs Coordinator. Vuletin said that budget expenditure documents are not public; however, the administration could provide a summary of categories of major expenses. According to Vuletin, approximately $21,000 was raised for O-Week 2020 and expenses amounted to about $23,000. Over $11,000 was raised from community law firms plus another $10,000 from student fees. This was half of what was raised in 2019. The 2020 O-Week expenses included masks, video production, t-shirts, lanyards, hospitality for equity group gatherings, snacks for students, and stipends for the student coordinators.

Vuletin would not tell me why the expenditure documents are confidential, but directed me to Terry Gardiner, the Director of Student Programs, for further questions.

I met with Gardiner in August 2021 to dig deeper into the O-Week budget and address the surplus rumour. Based on the numbers I received from Vuletin, this rumour seemed categorically false. Gardiner likewise debunked the theory of a significant surplus and confirmed that if any money were leftover from the orientation budget, it would have been reabsorbed for use in the next year (2021 OWeek). Gardiner did mention that the confusion over a possible surplus could have originated from how the O-Week money is spent. First, the Faculty covers all of the costs and then later, the Students’ Law Society (SLS) reimburses the Faculty with $10,000 from collected student fees that central U of T provides the SLS. However, this reimbursement is sometimes delayed which could lead to the mistaken assumption that the SLS was holding an unaccounted for $10,000 following O-Week’s conclusion. Gardiner likewise noted that fundraising was difficult in 2020, leading to fewer donations than usual. I requested a breakdown of how much each firm provided to O-Week 2020 and Gardiner suggested I speak to the Advancement Office, the department responsible for the fundraising. Assistant Dean Advancement Jennifer Lancaster said that donor information could not be provided without

the consent of the donors. I asked why the Faculty does not request this consent from the contributors and was told that it is simply not part of the regular fundraising practice.

To get the student perspective, I asked Cave and Irwin about the fundraising challenges and whether the SLS had an itemized list of how the O-Week budget was spent. They informed me that O-Week is a collaboration between the Faculty administration and the student orientation coordinators with a limited role played by the SLS beyond the aforementioned student fees collection. A portion of the collected money from the students is spent by the orientation coordinators while the rest is spent by the Faculty administration and the coordinators do not see how the Faculty spends their portion. The orientation coordinators have no control over the budget and all expenses are approved by the Faculty. As Vuletin mentioned, the documents on these expenses are confidential. In terms of fundraising, O-Week 2020 ran into some problems due to a lack of donations from law firms. Firms were uncertain about their financial circumstances due to the still unexpected ramifications of the COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in more constrained donations.

The Budget Parallel to my O-Week investigation, I looked into the Faculty budget and expenses to understand how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted spending.

I emailed Assistant Dean Archbold requesting information on the budget and the subsequent spending and distribution of the budget during the 20202021 school year. Faculty Council discussed the 2020-2021 budget in November 2020 during their annual information session with central U of T administrators. However, I wanted the details of how the pandemic shifted spending in 2020 and where, for instance, savings for catering went. My request was forwarded to the Dean’s Office, the Faculty organ responsible for the budget. Dean Jutta Brunnée responded, claiming confidentiality to specifics, but did say that most budget categories were unaffected by the pandemic while some savings were seen in food provision and speaker travel for guest events.

Meanwhile, pandemic-related measures like classroom technology and safety measures (plexiglass screens, signage, cleaning protocols, hand-sanitizer stations, etc.) led to significant expenditures. Dean Brunnée directed me to the annual budget information session during the Faculty Council meeting on November 24, 2021 for more information.

I also reached out to the University of Toronto Planning & Budget Office to see if central U of T could provide any information on either the Faculty or the University’s spending. After contacting Jeff Lennon, the Executive Director for Institutional Planning & Budget Administration at the University, I received a reply from University of Toronto Media Relations. Media Relations encouraged me to review the University’s Financial Report from April 30, 2021 to access the budget information for U of T as a whole. I requested a more specific breakdown of the budget than that found in the Financial Report. Media Relations responded that separate financial statements for each Faculty are not published. The University then reiterated the COVID-19 implications on the budget found in the Financial Report; namely that University-wide travel and conference expenses went from $54 million in 2020 to $4 million in 2021, accounting for both guest speaker and employee travel. Any savings made in catering expenses were purported to be overshadowed by the increased cost of other supplies and services like enhanced cleaning measures and additional IT services.

At the Faculty Council meeting in November

THE FACULTY OF LAW EXPENSES BREAKDOWN FOR 2021-2022.

CREDIT: UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO PLANNING AND BUDGET OFFICE

2021, the University budget for the 2021-2022 school year was presented by the Vice-President of Operations and Real Estate Partnerships, Professor Scott Mabury. Across the University, tuition and fees make up 67 percent of the University’s revenue, while operating grants provide 21 percent, and 12 percent comes from “other” sources. Vice-President Mabury noted that U of T receives less revenue from research (only $50 million) compared to similar American universities. On expenses, Vice-President Mabury noted that 57 percent of the budget went to faculty and staff compensation, 14 percent to other expenses, 9 percent to student aid, and 8 percent each to capital, equipment, and occupancy costs. Currently, $122 million (4 percent) of the budget goes to the University of Toronto Pension Plan as a special payment that will eventually fade away.

Vice-President Mabury noted that the provincial tuition freeze led to an impact of $139 million on the operating budget.

For the Faculty of Law, expenses broke down as follows: 56 percent to staff compensation, 21 percent to University-wide costs/shared services (like libraries, facilities, student supports, and occupancy), 13 percent to financial aid, and 10 percent to “other” expenses (including travel, photocopiers, supplies, events, services, books, utilities, and fellowships).

Domestic tuition makes up 45 percent of the Faculty revenue with 19 percent covered by “other” revenue sources like donations and endowments.

Lennon noted that the Faculty of Law “is doing very, very, well” in terms of application rates and the Faculty is “not at risk of losing JD students.” Lennon likewise complimented the Faculty on its “highly successful” fundraising initiatives, especially in the realm of financial aid. At the Faculty, students receive $66,000 of endowed aid on average compared to $16,000 across the University. While financial aid at the Faculty is four times as high compared to the rest of U of T, it should be noted that domestic tuition at the Faculty is approximately $33,000 and tuition for an undergraduate Bachelor of Arts, for

example, is approximately $6,000. In other words, the Faculty of Law charges five and a half times more than a common undergraduate degree.

By the end of the budget presentation, none of my outstanding questions were answered. Similar to last year, the University and Faculty administration provided many numbers for broad categories but did not actually dive into specifics. As students, we must simply trust that all expenses are appropriate and assume that our millions of dollars are being well spent by the massive, opaque institution that is the University of Toronto.

What Does This All Mean?

I began this article with the high hopes of lifting the veil on university expenses. Predictably, I was met by resistance from every administration source due to the “confidentiality” of financial documents.

The Faculty and University administration point to financial reports and budget meetings as examples of transparency, but without actual depth, do these numbers really mean anything? What does “other” actually include within all of these graphs and charts? On the topic of donations, why would the Faculty not want this information to be public?

Moreover, what do the endowment and pension funds actually invest in? As students, we provide half of the institution’s revenue and yet we are given the bare minimum of financial information. Full disclosure, I am not a business student, I have never taken Business Organizations, and I have a cursory knowledge of how corporations operate so I do not know if I am simply pipe dreaming, but shouldn’t the people investing millions of dollars into an entity be given the chance to look under the hood and ensure that their money is being well spent? Why are detailed expenses confidential? If the University and the Faculty are being completely transparent and truly spent thousands of dollars on hand sanitizer, then what’s the harm in showing us the actual numbers?

THE FACULTY OF LAW PROJECTED NET REVENUE ALLOCATIONS CREDIT: UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO PLANNING AND BUDGET OFFICE

FEATURES

ultravires.ca

February 28, 2022 | 9

Looking Back on a History of Divestment When passionate student advocacy means navigating and resisting the University’s bureaucracy ALISHA KRISHNA (2L) On October 22, 2021, University of Toronto President Meric Gertler announced the University’s commitment to divest their investments in fossil fuel companies in the endowment fund and to eventually achieve net-zero carbon emissions in this fund by 2030. The endowment, valued at $4 billion, is a restricted fund which supports the University’s teachings and research. However, it is only part of the University’s investments and does not include the $6 billion pension fund, the estimated combined endowment of $664 million of the three federated colleges, or endowments associated with the School of Theolog y and Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre. Campaigns for divestment of these funds are ongoing but outside the scope of this article.

In his message, President Gert ler noted that “none have been more eloquent or impassioned [in calls for divestment] than our students, who have the most at stake.” A s a student who w itnessed the divestment organizing on campus, I was shocked. This advocacy happened because of students’ determination in explicit opposition to the administration’s ef forts to prevent and neutralize advocacy. In this context, and in the histor y of student activ ism at this Universit y, President Gert ler’s appreciation feels hollow at best.

Divest ment at the Universit y Since the 1980s, there have been at least f ive divestment campaigns on this campus.

In 1988, the Universit y pledged to completely divest endowment funds from companies operating in South A fr ica dur ing apartheid. The Facult y A ssociation approved divestment of the pension funds in 1990. In 1992, the Universit y rejected a call for divestment from tobacco industr ies, but eventually committed to divesting from them by 20 07.

In 2008, the group Students Taking Action Now: Darfur (STA ND) called for divestment from companies backing military violence in Sudan, but the campaign’s success is unclear. Finally, students have called for divestment from companies operating in Israel as early as 1994, and, most recently, as part of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions ( BDS) movement since 20 06.

In each campaign, students and facult y have expended enormous ef fort just to surv ive, let alone be successful. The biggest barr ier is maintaining the continuit y and institutional memor y such that any momentum can sur v ive the inev itable turnover as students graduate. In compar ing older divestment campaigns w ith the histor y of fossil fuel divestment, and particularly the anti-apartheid campaign, it seems that the Universit y has adopted increasingly bureaucratized and decentralized governance models so that ef fective advocacy takes longer and demands more re-

sources each time.

Responses to Divest ment Ca mpaig ns This process began immediately after the f irst post-secondary institution committed to divestment from South African apartheid in 1977, though the f irst calls for divestment at this University only began in 1983. In 1978, the Governing Council approved their Policy on social and political issues with respect to University divestment (the “Policy”).

Still in force, this Policy requires members of the University to submit a brief with 300 signatures from the University community that outlines the social injury at the heart of their divestment campaign. The President establishes an ad hoc committee, composed of members appointed from the University community, to consider the brief and make recommendations.

In October 2014, Toronto350.org, a group which had been organizing for fossil fuel divestment since 2012, presented their br ief for divestment to beg in this process.

President Gert ler appointed an ad hoc committee who released their report in December 2015, calling for divestment only from fossil fuel companies that “ blatant ly disregarded” reg ulations. By March 2016, President Gert ler published his W hite Paper tit led Beyond Divestment: Tak ing Decisive Action on Climate Change (the “ W hite Paper”) in response to the committee’s report. President Gert ler did not explicit ly commit to divestment, but instead proposed using Env ironmental, Social and Governance ( ESG) factors to inform investments and “decision-mak ing.” He also pledged to sign var ious climate agreements and to fund research.

Much has already been wr itten about how ESG factors are unreliable, and how, as of Januar y 2022, 59% of companies are not reporting their ESG factors in their annual reports. Students arg ued that the adoption of ESGs were an instance of “greenwashing,” where companies market themselves as env ironmentally fr iendly while tak ing no substantive steps towards change. The same idea is also present in President Gert ler’s October announcement where the W hite Paper was character ized as a “ key milestone in the journey” to full divestment, though they were fundamentally opposed to student demands.

The decision to invest based on ESG factors has also reduced the problem of climate change only w ith respect to the fact that fossil fuel companies pollute, foregoing an intersectional lens which, for example, understands fossil fuel production in the larger context of capitalism, colonialism and anti-Indigenous sovereignt y. The recent announcement makes the same mistakes as well; solutions focus on fossil fuels, not the w ider problem of climate justice.

The idea of “responsibly investing”

based on vag ue metr ics is an old one. W hen students raised the issue of divestment from South A fr ican apartheid in 1983, the Universit y f irst arg ued that using their f inancial assets to express disapproval of the South A fr ican government would be inappropr iately political, and then committed to partial divestment based on vag ue cr iter ia found in the Sullivan Pr inciples. These pr inciples, which required equit y in hir ing and wage increases in South A fr ican workplaces, faced vehement objection on the grounds that they took no real steps to make systemic change. The Universit y also began to of fer up to four bursar ies to Black South A fr ican students in 1985.

W hen the President commissioned another rev iew of the divestment policy in 1987, Professor A .P Thornton, the author of the report, unequivocally supported full divestment on the grounds that Universit y investment is an inherent ly political act.

Partial divestment was inef fective.

Even after the Governing Council approved full divestment of the endowment fund in 1988, the Universit y had more work to do. Divestment of pension fund assets was delayed until 1990, when the Ontar io government passed leg islation amending the “prudent investor” standard required of pension trustees, under the Trustee Act. This debate continued even after these investment policies were changed and the Business Board called on the Universit y to rescind the policy in 1993. Nelson Mandela would be elected in 1994, and South A fr ica’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission was struck in 1995. In 20 0 0, the Universit y gave an honorar y Doctor of Laws degree to the late A rchbishop Desmond Tutu, the South A fr ican anti-apartheid leader who has also expressed support for BDS and divestment from fossil fuel companies.

Fina ncia l Rest r uctu r ing Financial reporting has become less transparent and further removed from the Universit y. The Universit y of Toronto A sset Management Cor poration ( U TA M ) was created in 20 0 0 and took charge of the Universit y’s endowment and pension funds.

In 20 07, the Universit y reaf f irmed support for responsible investment, rather than divestment based on social responsibilit y, by creating the Responsible Investment Working Group, composed mainly of law students, but other w ise disconnected from broader student organizing. This Work ing Group evolved into a Committee of students, alumni and staf f, and most recent ly, a Committee exclusive to U TA M and its senior of f icers.

In 2019, climate justice organizers f iled a request for information pursuant to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act ( F IPPA), seek ing disclosure of details of

Universit y investments in fossil fuel companies. The request was unsuccessful. This was a far cr y from the President’s voluntary disclosure of investments in 1987. Moreover, the FIPPA response states that by June 30, 2019, there were “no direct holdings of public equit y investments [of fossil fuel companies] in the Pension and Endowment portfolios managed by U TA M.” This statement is inconsistent w ith the 2021 announcement that “[w]ithin the next 12 months, [ U TA M ] w ill divest from all direct investments in fossil fuel companies.”

W hether intentional or not, the Universit y’s restructur ing is creating a signif icant barr ier for students w ishing to hold the institution accountable. Furthermore, as f inances become more removed from the main institution, advocacy, direct ly to those in charge, requires far more resources. In the context of fossil fuel divestment, the Universit y has pooled its pension funds w ith those from Trent, Guelph, and Queen’s Universities in a new cor poration, the Universit y Pension Plan Ontar io, founded in July 2021.

Pr ior campaigns have taught climate justice organizers that their work is not f inished. A broad coalition of students and student unions, facult y, and labour unions have recent ly formed a coalition named Divestment & Beyond Uof T, which w ill advocate for divestment of the pension fund, and continued divestment from fossil fuels.

Heartened by the recent divestment announcement, students af f iliated w ith Divestment & Beyond are organizing events w ith the Universit y to continue the conversation. Ef forts are being made to connect w ith divestment movements across Trent, Guelph, and Queen’s Universities.

Looking A head The anti-apartheid campaign in the 1980s ran parallel to the grow ing concern about the health impacts of tobacco products and increasing calls for divestment from these companies. In a 1985 Governing Council debate on divestment from South A fr ica, a government appointee, opposed to the idea of the Universit y tak ing a “political” stance, asked whether divestment from apartheid implied divestment from tobacco. The answer, we would discover in 20 07, was yes.

The University f inally accepts that investments of a $4 billion endowment fund can be used to shape the global conversation on climate change. From apartheid, to tobacco, to fossil fuels, students have always been quick to identify ways the University can make substantial, global changes with its investments. Students do “have the most at stake.” We do not have time for another eight years to form a plan to cease the harms caused by university investments.

10 | February 28, 2022

FEATURES

ultravires.ca

Inclusive Excellence? Continued from page 1 mit her Certificate of Disability. Over the course of the semester, Stabenow also offered adaptive seating, a pass to leave class if Sheikh was experiencing a panic attack or chronic flare up, and a designated seat near the front of the room. Sheikh only followed up on the offer of adaptive seating. According to Sheikh, Stabenow never replied.

September 2021: Sheikh then turned to Faculty administration, requesting occasional remote access for disability related reasons from Assistant Dean, JD Program, Alexis Archbold, who then sat on the Accommodations Committee. Assistant Dean Archbold suggested getting notes from classmates. When Sheikh asked how to request access to Zoom links for classes, she was allegedly told that these links were only available for students who needed them for COVID-19 related reasons.

The volunteer note-taking program was Sheikh’s only choice. By the end of September, Sheikh had not received access to notes for three out of four of her classes. There was no volunteer notetaker for the entire semester for one of her classes, and even when notes were provided in other classes, they were lacking context and uploaded too late for Sheikh to engage with the materials when she was able to attend class live.

Sheikh contacted Stabenow twice in September but received no reply. On September 20, Sheikh called Assistant Dean, Academic, Sara Faherty to inquire about the in-person policy at the Faculty. Assistant Dean Faherty allegedly stated, “it was not a matter of undue hardship” to contact Stabenow and obtain remote learning accommodations through Accessibility Services. Sheikh then reached out to White, who offered support in obtaining interim mental health care as a result of Sheikh’s deteriorating physical and mental health.

October 2021: Sheikh tried to resolve the situation through Acting Assistant Dean, JD Program, Brittany Twiss. Twiss reiterated that a formal request must be made through Accessibility Services, but that the Accommodations Committee and Faculty could issue interim Zoom links in the meantime. When Acting Assistant Dean Twiss ended her email with the following statement, Sheikh felt as though the Faculty might force her to go on leave under the University's Mandated Leave of Absence Policy: “If at any time, you wish to discuss the possibility of retroactive leave or changing to half-time status, please let me know.”

Having exhausted all other avenues, on October 10, Sheikh called the Dean’s office.

Sheikh left a message with an administrator, stating that she would like to speak to Dean Jutta Brunnée about the Faculty’s failure to provide adequate accommodations.

November 2021: Sheikh’s request for remoting learning through Accessibility Services was denied because her disabilities were not “uniquely and specifically tied to the COVID-19 pandemic.” The Faculty communicated to Accessibility Services that “in person participation is a fundamental requirement of their programs, relating to core competencies and learning objectives they have in place for all their students.” According to Sheikh, Michael Nicholson, Director of Accessibility Services, advised that this decision was out of Accessibility Services’ control. Further to a request for clarification on the JD program’s mandatory in-person requirement, Sheikh was directed back to senior administration at the Faculty. They had already been in communication for months.

After another month of fighting for her right to equal access to education at U of T Law, Sheikh reached out to Dean Brunnée again,

this time via email. She asked for a 30-minute phone call. Again, Dean Brunnée referred the matter back to Assistant Dean Faherty.

December 2021: After fighting the administration for months, Sheikh signed a retroactive deferral and received a tuition refund on December 10. The decision to defer stemmed from the Faculty’s refusal to provide the accommodations that Sheikh and her medical team felt were necessary to successfully complete 1L. Sheikh “continuously had to ask for accommodations” alongside keeping up with school and addressing her health concerns.

According to Shiekh, “all [her] professors were supportive, it was the administration that was ableist.” In fact, three out of four of Sheikh’s professors were apologetic when she told them that she felt forced to withdraw.

Sheikh ultimately decided not to appeal internally because the appeals committee does not have the power to change law school policy.

You might be asking yourself: why would someone fight so hard to stay in such an unaccommodating environment? In Sheikh’s words: “I fully have the right to be here.” She is fighting to exercise that right, just like every other student admitted to U of T Law. Sheikh expressed that she always wanted to be a lawyer, and she is not ready to give up on that dream just yet. Furthermore, she cannot apply to any other law school in the world without forfeiting her seat in the 2022-2023 entering JD class. With her HRTO application, Sheikh wants to see the Faculty immediately change their policies for students with disabilities, waiving the in-person requirement, and providing online access as needed for non-COVID-19 related reasons.

I reached out to the University and involved University actors for comments relating to Sheikh’s claim. In response, a U of T spokes-

person stated: “Given that this is an active claim before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, and due to the privacy limitations under which the University operates, we are unable to provide comment at this time on this matter.”

Sheikh is not the only one. The Students’ Law Society, University of Toronto Law Union, and the Disabled Law Students' Association have all been fighting for the Faculty to be more flexible in accommodating students.

While each organization has adopted slightly different stances on policy preferences, the overarching theme is the same: U of T Law is not doing enough. In February, a series of emails from Associate Dean Christopher Essert revealed the Faculty’s new stance on recording lectures, online access to lectures through Zoom links, and the accommodations process. The changes came too late for Sheikh, but there may be hope for students moving forward. Whether the Faculty makes a good faith effort to fully implement these policies remains to be seen, but they have been stated publicly and in a manner that may make it easier for students to advocate for themselves in the future.

To every administrator and staff member implicated in Sheikh’s application, you should be deeply ashamed. To every student who has fought for change on behalf of our disabled brothers and sisters, I see you, and I appreciate you. To everyone reading this, I hope you reflect on how you can make the institutions you are a part of more accessible. To Anushay, I am rooting for you.

Editor’s Note: Anushay Sheikh is documenting her journey on Instagram @anushaysheikh. This is an ongoing story as the claim is currently before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.

Asian Law Students of Canada Virtually Celebrate Lunar New Year Expanding beyond the provincial borders JENNIFER SUN (2L)

THE POSTER BANNER FOR THE EVENT. CREDIT: IVY LOK (2L, LINCOLN ALEXANDER SCHOOL OF LAW)

One of the few positive changes brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic is the use of Zoom and other virtual platforms that enable us to connect with more people in more places. The Asia Law Society (ALS) at U of T Law certainly took advantage of this, working in collaboration with other Asian law student associations across Canada to celebrate Lunar New Year for the second year in a row.

In addition to our amazing friends from last year at Osgoode, Queen’s, Lincoln Alexander, uOttawa, Western, and Windsor, students from Dalhousie, Bora Laskin, and McGill joined us this year on Saturday, February 5, 2022 to welcome the Year of the Tiger. Building on last year’s success, this event offered an opportunity for law students across Ontario and beyond to meet with

one another, share experiences, and collectively foster a community that could last even after law school.

The two-hour event began with a few rounds of networking breakout rooms, followed by an origami contest. Photos of adorable origami tigers were uploaded for voting on a Discord server that was previously set up as a virtual meeting place for students from different law schools to interact and expand their own networks. We also had a spreadsheet where students could leave their contact and social media information to continue their conversations.

The night ended with board games and social breakout rooms. As a proxy for the tradition of red pockets, each school graciously contributed to a pool of prizes that were awarded to the ori-

gami contest winners and runner-ups, as well as two rounds of raffles.

Jonathan Hou (3L), an Upper Year Executive of the ALS, participated in the networking, origami, and Gartic Phone events this year. “I really enjoyed it! It was really nice to have McGill and Dalhousie join us this time. Meeting new people is always enjoyable, as it’s a chance to get to know different perspectives about law school!” stated Hou. He added that, “Making origami was also really fun, though the best part had to be playing Gartic Phone. We ended up with a lot of humourous drawings.”

My personal favourite moment involved some unexpected wisdom only law students could relate to. For the Codenames breakout room I was hosting, one participant told us a legendary tale

of a group of law students using a landmark case as the hint to link three seemingly unrelated words to claim the win. I truly hope everyone reading this article will remember this pro tip in your next Codenames game where you have law students on your side.

The night was extremely fun and we had about 60 students in attendance. Given this success, the event organizers at each school are excited and optimistic to make this an annual tradition with the prospect of expanding westward next year to include students from the Prairies and the West Coast.

Editor’s Note: Jennifer Sun is the co-president of Asia Law Society and helped organize this event.

February 28, 2022 | 11

ultravires.ca

Finding a Partner in Life and Law What to know before pursuing a fellow law student JONATHAN HOU (3L) To date or not to date another fellow law student, that is the question.

Without a doubt, some people have found others at the law school that they are romantically interested in. Perhaps one made the f irst move leading either to a date or rejection.

And indeed, some people have found the right person at the place where we have experienced both ups and downs as we prepare to enter the legal profession. To have commonly aligned career interests, to be able to go through pain and suffering together, to be able to share the same achievements—how much more romantic could it get?

But many people come to law school with prior relationships or are exclusively looking for people outside the conf ines of 78 and 84 Queen’s Park. For them, law school is a place where they want to focus on beginning their careers rather than f inding romance. They wish to maintain the separation between their personal life and life at law school. Law school is already as intense as it is; do you really want to rant (or listen to a rant) about a competitive moot’s run-through on Valentine’s Day from your signif icant other (SO)?

Dating a fellow law student has quite a few up-sides. Law school is a place where we have frequent interactions with one another and

plenty of opportunities to get to know each other really well. If you were to indeed fall for somebody, you can be rest assured that this person shares similar ambitions and understands whatever struggles you may be going through. One student pointed out that support from a SO familiar with life in law school could be really important, particularly in the middle of a global pandemic that has kept many of us apart. Having someone who could provide study support and help with adjusting to a new environment can be very benef icial.

Another student pointed out the joy of being in the same class with your SO and the importance of having someone who could help you relieve stress and improve mental health.

Yet another student pointed out that your SO can also provide you with “free networking for your future career.” Even those who have reservations about dating other law students can acknowledge the benef its of having someone who understands your diff iculties, like the recruit or exams, and can share notes and maps with you. Your SO can be the best study buddy out there.

But there are also some unavoidable downsides. Many students agree that your life in law school could easily become intertwined with your personal life if you were to date a

The Pros and Cons of Dating a Law Student It’s all fun and games until they start quoting statutes in fights HYE-SEON JUNG (1L) What do non-law students think about dating law students? We asked some individuals in the community for their hot takes on the pros and cons of dating a law student.

CONS: •

PROS: •

•

They’re busy with readings so you can always get time to yourself. Spending time with your significant other (SO) is great.

But sometimes you just want to lie in bed and scroll through Instagram reels and not have to give them attention all the time. Sometimes it’s therapeutic lying in bed, listening to the crisp click of your SO’s mechanical keyboard as they frantically brief cases for their 9:30 am class.

They’re going to make $$$. I want to retire early and I know my partner will be ballin’ as a corporate lawyer in New York.

•

They sometimes know criminal lawyers… just in case.

•

They’re good at proofreading your emails. They know how to get to the point and write crisp, succinct, and clear sentences.

•

Good at quickly getting a vibe on if something is legal or not. This is why landlords hate renting to law students and lawyers.

•

They know their coffee.

•

Prenups! They would know not to take it personally. It’s all about protecting your assets and not a lack of commitment, right?

Divorce. I’m worried about going through a divorce with a lawyer. What if they leave me and take everything? This happened to my friend’s uncle.

•

In debt. I know they’ll pay it off quickly but right now I have to pay for all the dates. I know it’s a long term investment, though.

•

They have a caffeine addiction. My partner drinks a gallon of coffee every day and still sleeps like the dead. I’m concerned for their health.

•

They don’t read the terms and conditions for you. I gave my SO terms and conditions for them to read and they immediately scrolled to the bottom and clicked “I agree”.

•

They’ll read their textbook right after a romantic date. No time for pillow talk or a nap.

•

They make being a law student their entire personality. They only talk about law-related stuff. I know too much about law school and the law for someone who doesn’t even go to law school.

•

They’ll wear law merch to dinner. Have you ever dressed up for a nice evening out and they show up wearing their U of T Law hoodie?

•

Inflated sense of ego.

•

Don’t try debating them.

fellow law student—not something that all students perceive positively. One student expressed their reservations about dating other law students, saying that “law school is already hyper-competitive and stressful” and “navigating a relationship within those conf ines would be really diff icult.” They noted that they would “rather have [their] own bubble for work and academics and not mix [their] personal life into it, especially given the high-intensity nature of the legal f ield.”

Another student echoed this sentiment, noting that “always having to talk about things like mooting, recruits, classes, and other law student stuff is too much school.” This could also exacerbate stressful situations if the two students get vastly different grades or different outcomes in a recruit, as yet another student pointed out. Even those who were more positive about dating other law students mentioned their concerns for what others within the law school community might think in the event that such a relationship did not work out as planned. After all, our main goal in law school is to graduate successfully and begin our journey in a competitive profession. If dating others in law school turns out to be an impediment to this goal, is it really something worth committing to?

Furthermore, there are some notable benef its to dating someone not involved in the legal profession. One student whose partner works in the tech sector pointed out some of these benef its. Both sides can exchange their perspectives on their respective professions and can help each other network with people from their industry. Dating outside law school could thus lead to more career opportunities.

And considering the reasoning and argumentative skills law school equips us with, law students could not possibly lose an argument to someone not in the legal profession—an advantage that ought not to be yielded.

In the end, there is no right or wrong answer to this question. What really matters is your own preference. If you f ind a person at the law school that you like and you want to have someone by your side going through the same joys and struggles as you, then by all means, take that chance! If you prefer to date someone outside the law school who has a completely different perspective and gives you the space to avoid thinking about the hypercompetitiveness of the legal profession, then you should stick to that! As one student correctly points out, “if two people click, they click.”

Why did you choose McMillan?

I believe a successful law firm is one that empowers you to seek difficult challenges, while nurturing the skills you need to overcome them, irrespective of your year of call. From my first days of articling, McMillan encouraged me to take on top-tier, complex files, and enabled me to succeed through strong mentorship and guidance.

Shahram Khalili

Associate, Commercial Real Estate Group

2017 - 2022 Take the lead in your career.

McMillan LLP | Vancouver | Calgary | Toronto | Ottawa | Montréal | Hong Kong | mcmillan.ca

FEATURES

12 | February 28, 2022

ultravires.ca

Treat Yo’ Self

Our favourite sweet and savoury treats in the city KAITLYN NELSON (2L), LAUREN PAPAROUSIS (2L), AND SHAE ROTHERY (2L)

CHOCOLATE BARS FROM SOMA CHOCOLATEMAKER. CREDIT: KAITLYN NELSON

It’s been a long winter. We think that you deserve a little treat for opening up your laptop everyday for the past two months to log on to Zoom School of Law. Though coffee and snacks are coming back to campus twice a week, you’ll still need to satisfy your mid-afternoon cravings during the other three business days. Whether you’re looking to indulge in your next guilty pleasure or pleading the fifth, we’ve got you covered.

Apologies in advance to the celiacs—this article is gluten-heavy.

SOM A Chocolate make r | mu lt iple locat ions Kaitlyn: If you’re looking for a last minute gift for a special someone, then SOMA Chocolatemaker has got you covered! SOMA has something for everyone—chocolate bars, truffles, fruit bars, and hot chocolate. Their Distillery District location is bright and airy, and gives you a behind-the-scenes view of the chocolate-making process. The hardest part of visiting SOMA was narrowing down our choices— there were too many things we wanted to try. We ended up going with a variety of bars (roasted white, starry night, mango chilli, raspberry) and a handful of truffles (rose pistachio, Vietnamese coffee, sea salted caramel). Everything was delicious and lived up to expectations. I highly recommend that you visit the next time you’re looking for a treat.

Recommended treat: mango chilli bar, starry night chocolate bar, or any of their truffles!

BREAD FOR DAYS AT FORNO CULTURA! CREDIT: SHAE ROTHERY

Rosel le | 3 62 K i ng St E Lauren: If you’ve ever passed by Roselle’s King Street storefront, you’ve probably seen a line wrapped around the block and wondered to yourself, “Is this worth it, or is this just another classic case of Toronto residents blindly jumping in line for the newest trend?” We are here to tell you that Roselle is absolutely, 100% worth lining up for. I have never been disappointed by a single pastry I have purchased from Roselle and you can trust me because I have purchased a lot. My favourites are the Earl Grey shorties and the banana cream pie eclairs. My mom would also like to tell the world that this is her favourite bakery in Toronto and she highly recommends the chestnut vanilla entremet..

Recommended treat: Earl Grey shortie Bla ckbird Baking Co. | mu lt iple locat ions Shae: If you’ve spent any time in Toronto, you almost certainly know Blackbird. Blackbird specialises in sourdough, so they’ve got you covered if you killed your pandemic sourdough starter (confession: I did). But Blackbird is no one-trick pony. They have all the classic bakery offerings you could ever need—croissants, scones, tarts, and more! If you don’t live near their Kensington Market or Riverside locations, have no fear. There are a ton of cafes around the city that stock Blackbird, so you can almost always satisfy your post-constitutional law

PAIN AU CHOCOLAT AND ALMOND CROISSANT FROM BLACKBIRD. CREDIT: KAITLYN NELSON

croissant craving (Sorry Coffee Co. is the closest to campus). Like Roselle, Blackbird is another spot where you can observe the seemingly Toronto-specific social phenomenon of people joining a line with no idea what they’re lining up for.

Recommended treat: pain au chocolat Barbe rshop Pati sse r ie | 859 College St Kaitlyn: If I had to pick a favourite pastry in Toronto it would be the lemon bichon from Barbershop Patisserie. Run by Jill Barber, formerly the head pastry chef at Blackbird Baking Co, Barbershop Patisserie at College and Ossington is definitely worth a visit. The staff is friendly and the shop is small but bright. Barbershop opened in the middle of the pandemic and currently has a limited menu of baked goods, specialising in puff pastry items (both savoury and sweet). I will definitely be going back soon to try more!

Recommended treat: lemon bichon Robin son B rea d | 6 Brock Ave Lauren: I nearly got hit by a car biking to Robinson Bread but the focaccia was so good that I (almost) forgot about that part. Located in Parkdale, Robinson Bread has a minimalistic storefront offering an assortment of breads and baked goods. Their

seasonal cookie boxes are the perfect compliment to a coffee—and they are conveniently located in the same space as the wonderful Sam James Coffee Bar. The star of the show for me was their focaccia. I have personally posted desperately on several baking forums asking for advice on how to recreate their focaccia with no luck. I guess I will just need to continue to risk my life on the not-so-bike-friendly streets of Toronto for Robinson Bread, and I would recommend you do the same.* *not legal advice.

Recommended treat: rosemary sesame and garlic honey focaccia For no Cultura | mu lt iple locat ions Shae: If you’re looking for a bread with that wow factor, Forno Cultura is the place for you. Bring their focaccia to parties and you’ll secure yourself a permanent invite. I almost can’t put my thoughts about the focaccia into words. It’s airy, flavourful, and downright delightful. Their focaccia barese has the perfect balance of olive oil, flaky salt, and acid from the tomatoes. Besides focaccia (which I’m obsessed with), Forno Cultura makes phenomenal biscotti. You can find Forno Cultura on Queen West and King West, and for our Bay Street friends, they also have outlets in both First Canadian Place and Union Station.

Recommended treat: focaccia barese

FEATURES

ultravires.ca

February 28, 2022 | 13

Wines for Any Relationship Status

In Vino Veritas JANICE FUNG (1L) Are you in a long-term relationship where you still want to do nice things for your partner, but you’re no longer trying to constantly impress them?

Chocolate Factory might be the wine for you. You don’t need to waste your time getting chocolate and wine for a special night when you can have them both in one bottle!

Shiraz is the New World take on the Rhone Valley’s syrah. It is often bigger and bolder than its predecessor. However, I found this Australian shiraz to be smooth and silky, with low tannins. While not quite as chocolate-y as expected, this wine was rich and plush, with a hint of black forest cake.

To pair, I’d recommend red fruits like strawberries or cherries. Or, if you’re feeling more adventurous, it would complement a mole sauce quite well.

Valentine's Day may now be over, but that doesn’t mean there is no excuse to open a bottle of wine and celebrate love. Real ones know there’s no need for a mass-market holiday to express gratitude and affection for all your loved ones. I, for one, spent Valentine's Day snuggled on the couch with my true love (my 13-year-old Pekingese), and a glass of Cab Franc… which, to be honest, didn’t look much different from any other self-care night. This month, we share wines that can be enjoyed with your everyday Valentine, Galentine, or if you just need some self-love time.

I start us off with a botrytis-affected semillon, my favourite dessert wine from the Niagara region. For all of us living our best lives, Angela recommends a fresh Chablis from northern Burgundy. Reya introduces us to a decadent shiraz from down under.

Meanwhile, Tom shares a rich baco noir, a grape variety produced almost exclusively in Canada.

Jared finishes it off with a juicy sparkling red from an innovative wine producer located in Prince Edward County.

CREDIT: ANGELA GU

CREDIT: JARED BARKMAN

Angela Gu (3L JD/MBA)

Jared Barkman (1L)

Closerie des Alisiers Vieilles Vignes Chablis 2019

CREDIT: JANICE FUNG

“Fronte-Snack,” Trail Estate

$27.95 at the LCBO

$34 at Grape Witches

You may have come across the meme of 1970s diet advice from Vogue that set out a plan comprising hard-boiled eggs, tiny steaks, black coffee, and Chablis. It was adapted from Helen Gurley Brown’s 1962 book Sex and the Single Girl, which presents guidance, sometimes relevant but sometimes outdated, on living your best life as a single girl. Brown covers everything, from decor to dinner parties. I had this bottle as a nod to Brown’s feminism, which was revolutionary at the time. This Chablis from Closerie des Alisiers hits like fresh laundry on the nose: lightly, lemony, and floral. There are notes of orchard fruit, and ends in a satisfyingly zippy minerality. Pair with apple chips and a semi-soft mellow cheese, unless you’re on that Vogue diet.

Don’t tell my long-time partner, but personally, I’ve always found Valentine’s Day to be a rather unpalatable excuse for a holiday, a sinister consumerist scheme to keep subpar florists in business and to preoccupy shoddy chocolate factories in the dreary period between Christmas and Easter. If you’re also the Valentine’s equivalent of Scrooge, I’ve got just the wine for you: Fronte-Snack, a nifty Frontenac Noir by Trail Estate, perhaps the most innovative and esteemed natural wine producer in Prince Edward County.

An unconventional sparkling red wine made in the pét-nat style (an ancient, natural method of carbonation that has seen a glorious resurgence in recent years), this is meant to be drank young, allowing one to easily forego any faux-romantic notions of cellaring it for your happily ever after. And the beautiful deep-red, nearly-purple colour may convince your love that you’ve mustered up some semblance of holiday spirit after all. Having been compared by the producer to cranberry Canada Dry, this wine oozes of tart, juicy black fruits and overripe berries, and might be just the trick for restoring your joie de vivre.

Janice Fung (1L)

CREDIT: TOM RUSSELL

Tom Russell (2L) Henry of Pelham Speck Family Reserve Baco Noir 2019 $27.95 at the LCBO

Stratus, Botrytis-Affected Semillon

Every once in a while, you might find yourself in a relationship that makes you say: “We obviously shouldn’t be together, but I’m having a pretty good time for now.” For your next date night with your “soulmate,” get yourself a wine that says: “Something is very wrong here, but if we don’t bring it up, maybe we can make this work.”

For this purpose, I recommend an Ontario wine. I chose to review the 2019 Baco Noir Speck Family Reserve from Henry of Pelham Estate. This is a medium-bodied, fruity wine, with a sugar content of 13 g/L. This wine has a beautiful purple colour and aromas of dark fruit and smoked meats.

For flavour, I noted mulberry, black plum, and bacon. This wine is smooth and delicious. I recommend pairing it with beef steak, burgers, or lamb.

$35.20, Stratus If you’re looking for a wine that's just as sweet as your Valentine, give this botrytis-affected semillon a try. Botrytis is a grey fungus that affects plants and fruits (if you've ever had grey mouldy strawberries, you've met botrytis). In winemaking, botrytis, also known as "noble rot," occurs when the vines are exposed to humid conditions, often when the grapes are ripe. The fungus causes the grapes to raisin, concentrating their flavours and sugars. The result is a syrupy dessert wine that isn’t quite as sweet as your typical icewine.

This particular bottle has an aromatic nose of honey and apricot. The palate is citrusy with a slightly earthy note. The sweetness is refreshing and doesn't linger. This wine will pair nicely with a dessert or to balance out a tangy cheese plate.

CREDIT: REYA MANERIKAR

Reya Manerikar (2L) Zonte’s Footstep Chocolate Factory Shiraz $19.95 at the LCBO

FEATURES

14 | February 28, 2022

ultravires.ca

A Back to School Lunch Box Recipe Easy quinoa salad JACQUELINE HUANG (2L) Law school classes will fully return to in-person after reading week, and that means the lunch box (or the dinner box, for those of you who have evening classes) is back in business! I usually pack the random leftovers from my weekend cooking into my lunch box, and that sometimes creates a bit of planning pressure when I don’t feel like doing serious cooking. But I have recently discovered a lunch box formula that is easy to prepare, low in cost, and incredibly satisfying. The best thing about this formula is that it does not require much thought to be tasty and filling, and it certainly has made me look forward to lunchtime at school!

Quinoa Base (4 servings)

• Juice from a whole lemon (if not a fan of lemons, use less) • 2 full teaspoons Dijon mustard • 2 full teaspoons maple syrup • 1/2 teaspoon fine sea salt • Ground black pepper to taste • 2 tablespoons or more water, to loosen the sauce *Or use your favourite sauce/salad dressing instead. I started with a lemon tahini dressing just because I had a big bag of lemons lying around. I have recently tried putting bibimbap sauce on the quinoa base and it tastes amazing.

• 1 cup quinoa*

Method

• 1 cup barley OR 1/2 cup pearl barley + 1/2 cup green whole lentils

Combine tahini, olive oil, lemon juice, mustard, maple syrup, salt, and pepper in a jar you want to store the dressing in. Mix them up until smooth.

Slowly add the water until it reaches your desired consistency. Taste and add more salt, lemon juice, or maple syrup if necessary. Leftovers will last a week in the fridge.

*Quinoa used to be pricey, but I recently spotted them at No Frills in bulk at a decent price. If you have access to Costco, they probably have the cheapest quinoa in town.

Method Quinoa – Rinse quinoa before cooking to get rid of the bitter taste. Place the quinoa with two cups of water in a pot with a lid. Bring the pot to a boil in medium heat. When boiling, turn down to low heat and let it simmer for 15-20 minutes, until the water has almost evaporated. Remove the pot from the heat, place the lid on and let it steam for 5 minutes. Fluff the quinoa with a spoon immediately.

Barley & Lentils – Rinse before cooking. Put them in a pot with about 3 cm of water above the grains (or per package instructions). Bring to a boil in medium heat. When boiling, turn down to low heat, and let it simmer for 20-25 minutes until the barley is tender (if using lentils, they will be cooked at about the same time). Drain the excess water.

I sometimes put some roasted pumpkin in the base if I have it on hand. Roasted sweet potatoes and/or regular potatoes should also work fine.

Dressing for the Base* • 1/4 cup tahini • 1/4 cup extra virgin olive oil (I sometimes swap half of it for more tahini to yield a more creamy texture)

Protein • Extra-firm tofu, sliced* • 1 part soy sauce, to taste • (Optional) 1 part mirin OR 1 part water + a bit of sugar/maple syrup • Cooking oil

A COLOURFUL QUINOA SALAD. CREDIT: JACQUELINE HUANG.

soy sauce mixture. Stir and flip to let both sides absorb the seasoning. Wait until the soy sauce has almost evaporated, and then remove the tofu from the pan immediately.

leaves of the greens into the pan. Continue to stir fry until the vegetables have softened. Add soy sauce (and vinegar for cabbage) at the end, stir for a few seconds, and remove from heat.

Vegetables

*I know it’s a controversial move to stir fry kale, but trust me—it tastes great with soy sauce or oyster sauce, and the stems will not be wasted either!

(1 serving, can be doubled up)

*4-6 slices for 1 serving. You can prepare 2-3 servings in one go and store them in the fridge. I would recommend tofu without soaking water – the firmer, the better. Extra-firm tofu is available in every supermarket, but if you go to an Asian supermarket, I would highly recommend getting a block of unflavoured pressed tofu there (it’s also cheaper).

Alternatively, wrap a block of extra-firm tofu in a tea towel and put a heavy pot on top of it for 30 minutes.

• 1/2 red, yellow, or orange bell pepper

Method

• If using napa cabbage, a bit of vinegar to taste

Slice the tofu into about 0.5cm thick slices. Grab a large non-stick pan. Heat oil in the pan with medium heat, and when the oil is hot, place the sliced tofu in it. Pan-fry for about 2 minutes. When the bottoms are golden brown, flip to fry the other sides for another 2 minutes. Meanwhile, mix the soy sauce and mirin in a measuring cup. When both sides of the tofu are golden brown, pour in the

• A handful of kale*, Chinese greens (bok choi, choi sum, gai lan, etc.), or if you want to go extra thrifty, napa cabbage • Soy sauce, to taste • Cooking oil • A clove of garlic, sliced (optional)

Method Slice the bell pepper. Roughly chop the leaves of the kale/greens/cabbage, and chop the stems into small pieces. Heat some oil in a non-stick pan or wok on medium heat. Add garlic if using and fry until fragrant. Fry the bell pepper and stems of the greens first. When they become a bit soft, toss the

Assembly and Storage To serve on a plate: Combine one part (1/4 of cooked grains) of quinoa with one part of barley and lentils to make the base. Mix one heaping tablespoon of dressing into the base. Layer the tofu and vegetables on top.

To pack for lunch: Mix the quinoa base with the dressing and then place the tofu on top. I usually package the vegetables in a separate container because they can be too watery.

Storage and make-ahead instructions: Store the leftover quinoa base and tofu in containers in the fridge for a maximum of four days. The dressing can be stored for about a week in the fridge. The cooked vegetables can last for one day, so I would recommend cooking them fresh or cooking no more than two servings at a time.

Ryan’s Movie Corner Alternative Valentine’s Day viewing RYAN SHAH (3L) For the second straight year, Valentine’s Day isn’t quite what it’s supposed to be. As we wake up from the slumber of an Omicron-induced lockdown, we are confronted with yet another holiday which will inevitably be warped according to the exigencies of COVID-19. While restaurants, movies and museums are again open, couples must navigate a Valentine’s Day celebration faced with continuing mask mandates and capacity limits. Though with each passing year we

seem to come ever closer to normalcy, February 14, 2022 will prove to be yet another day in what has been a long pandemic. To commemorate an atypical Valentine’s Day, I have collected two films that will serve this theme—atypical love stories that defy the norms of on-screen romance.

Punch-Drunk Love

(Paul Thomas Anderson) Punch-Drunk Love is a bizarre, absurd, and yet

vividly imagined film that uses every trick of the filmmaking trade to tell an impactful, coherent story. The film is a perfectly choreographed and self-assured depiction of anxiety—something viewers will certainly experience first-hand while watching.

The film tells the story of Barry Egan (Adam Sandler), a small business owner who is intensely lonely, and not a little strange. Barry is pulled out of his humdrum existence by two unrelated yet life altering events. On one hand, a group of

scammers ruthlessly tries to extort Barry. On the other, Barry falls in love with his sister’s co-worker, Lena Leonard (Emily Watson). As his relationship deepens and his conflict with the scammers intensifies, Punch Drunk Love constructs a perfect auditory and visual world to accompany the development of the film’s story.

Barry is an anxious man living in an equally anxiety-inducing world—this anxiety is not just a product of events depicted in the film, but also the Continued on next page

FEATURES

ultravires.ca

February 28, 2022 | 15

Ryan’s Movie Corner Continued from previous page film’s extremely unique use of sound design.

The film’s soundtrack maps perfectly onto the film’s narrative, with staccato notes woven masterly into the stop-start action of the film. To top off the film’s unnerving structure is an excellent performance by Adam Sandler, who proves to be a remarkably versatile actor (his performance in Uncut Gems being another excellent example).

Barry Egan is an awkward man who is at first filled with a terrible, miserable rage. Barry feels tormented and belittled by his family members, leading to shocking and uncomfortable outbursts. Though viewers will cringe at what they see—they will also feel completely engaged in Sandler’s performance.

Overall, this might not be the best film for Valentine’s Day viewing. It hardly tells a realistic tale of romance. But Punch-Drunk Love is such a

complete and well composed opus that it is required viewing for anyone interested in the depiction of emotion through the moving image.

10/10

The Worst Person in the World ( Joachim Trier)

The Worst Person in the World is a Norwegian film that depicts the life of Julie (Renate Reinsve), a young woman who navigates complicated romantic relationships and the personal development that goes with them.

The film, segmented into 12 chapters, first centres on Julie’s relationship with Aksel (Anders Danielsen Lie). Aksel is a comic book artist, 15 years Julie’s senior, who is interested in completely integrating Julie into his world and possibly

starting a family with her. Though Julie is at first very attached to Aksel, she eventually finds her interest in the relationship waning, as she becomes increasingly frustrated with his quirks and particularities.

Enter Elvind (Herbert Nordrum), a young barista who captures Julie’s attention when she crashes a party one night after a disappointing and unengaging night with Aksel. Caught between Elvind and Aksel, Julie must navigate her emotions, insecurities, and personal growth.

This saga is depicted with an expert touch and a unique style. Trier has a highly specific tone that manages to blend the goofy and the emotionally serious into something completely singular. Julie is occasionally bumbling, frequently insightful, and entirely relatable. The fights she gets in with her partners are harrowing and hurtful to watch

and the dilemmas she faces feel like real, difficult decisions.

The film’s emotionally-charged drama is punctuated with creative, funny, and visually expressive scenes that effortlessly mesh into the episodic 12-chapter narrative of the film. The film features several comedic digressions that contribute to, rather than detract from, the completeness and realism of the film. The film blends life’s ups and downs in a way that feels authentic and serious. When the film reaches its eventual emotional climax, the pain feels real and visceral. This is perhaps because of the film’s refusal to adhere to a self-serious tone. This film is an absolute must watch ahead of the Oscars, where it was nominated for Best International Feature Film and Best Original Screenplay.

8/10

Access to Justice and Community Legal Clinics Perspective from a DLS student caseworker

CLSA MEMBER Access to justice is a major problem that affects the Canadian legal system. Notably, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) Beverly McLachlin once stated, “we do not have adequate access to justice in Canada.” Former justice of the SCC Thomas Cromwell has also stated, “by nearly any standard, our current situation falls far short of providing access to the knowledge, resources and services that allow people effectively with civil and family legal matters.”

Within a three-year timeframe, it is estimated that roughly 45 percent of Canadians will experience a justiciable event. Around 50 percent of people will try to solve their own legal problems or represent themselves. Additionally, 42 to 90 percent of people blame costs as the main reason for not seeking legal support.

Coming into law school with a background in criminology and Canadian criminal justice, I am no stranger to this issue. I entered law school with the goal of developing a solution to this problem or helping alleviate it, at least. The main opportunity I had to work towards these goals is working with Downtown Legal Services (DLS) as both a summer student caseworker and as a part-time, for credit, caseworker during the academic year.

DLS & Access to Justice DLS is a community legal clinic that operates as a clinical education program. Law students are given the responsibility to engage in legal work under the supervision of staff lawyers.

DLS provides legal services within six areas of law: housing, employment, family, criminal, refugee and immigration law, and university affairs (within U of T). Law students convey their staff lawyer’s advice about the law and the client’s potential options, undertake negotiations with adverse parties, and represent their client in court and at tribunal appearances.

DLS provides services free of charge. Most of the clinic’s clients are low-income individuals, as DLS uses Legal Aid Ontario’s (LAO)

f inancial eligibility criteria. Individuals who receive social assistance are automatically eligible. Similarly, levy-paying University of Toronto students also qualify for legal services.

Outside of assisting individual clients, DLS also engages in public legal education.

DLS’ public legal education entails plain language workshops on legal topics which are presented to community agency staff and clientele.

My Experience with DLS My work as a caseworker has solely been within the Criminal Law and University Offences division. On the criminal law side, I mostly assist clients who have been charged with summary conviction offences (less ‘serious’ offences, such as a basic assault or theft).

On the University Offences side, I assist clients who have been charged with any academic offence, including plagiarism, unauthorized aid, and forgery.

Working at DLS has made me realize that access to justice issues, at least within the Greater Toronto Area, are much worse than I initially thought. Experiencing a legal issue can be one of the most stressful events to occur in one’s life. It is truly unfortunate that when these individuals turn to the justice system to seek help and advice, they are often left with nothing. This lack of access to justice is even more concerning because it mostly affects those who are most in need of legal services. It is the people who face access to justice problems (like DLS’ clients)—the marginalized, the systemically oppressed, those who have immigrated from other countries with no money or family, those with mental health issues, those with disabilities, those who cannot read, write, or speak English—who are in most need of a justice system that is open and willing to help.

Practically every client who I worked with at DLS experienced some set of access to justice issues: 1. Most, if not all, of the criminal law clients who I have worked with are on some form

of social assistance. Few have secure employment and, even if they are employed, they often make little to no money, falling far below the Canadian poverty line.

Therefore, retaining private legal counsel is far outside their f inancial reach.

2. Most, if not all, of my criminal law clients do not qualify for LAO certif icates for counsel. This is largely due to the nature of the offences at issue—DLS only takes clients with less serious offences where the Crown is not seeking a jail sentence and, thereby, prevents our clients from obtaining a certif icate despite almost always meeting f inancial eligibility requirements.

This means that hundreds, if not thousands of people who do not qualify for legal aid (and who cannot be assisted by DLS due to issues with jurisdiction or limited caseworker availability) are left without any kind of legal representation.

3. Unique to the Criminal Law division, we place our prospective clients on a waitlist so that we can help as many clients as possible. Yet, due to the massive amounts of persons charged with a criminal offence who do not qualify for legal aid, our waitlist sometimes reaches up to 50 people.

Clients often represent themselves on their criminal charges for several months until a caseworker becomes available to take their case. By the time these clients reach the top of our waitlist, they have often run out of time and their matter has been resolved without any legal representation.

4. The University Offences clients are also in similar situations. Academic offences can greatly affect students’ academic and professional careers. Sanctions for these students often range from one to three years suspension, or even expulsion.

Throughout the entire administrative process—whether it be the professor’s meeting, the Dean’s meeting, and possibly the tribunal hearing—students often lack representation. Should the matter proceed

to the tribunal level, the University retains a well-known and prestigious litigation f irm in Toronto. Retaining counsel is often too expensive for the average student and so, DLS is often the only realistic option.

The importance of access to justice in these two areas of practice are evident. Individuals charged with an academic offence face barriers to their education, possibly leading to severe long-term impacts. Criminal law clients often face the consequences of a criminal record, which is even more severe.

Not only has working at DLS enabled me to experience, f irst-hand, the access to justice needs within the GTA and the U of T community, it has also taught me a great deal about systemic societal barriers that likely contribute to a lack of access to justice. In addition to casework, credit caseworkers are required to attend weekly DLS seminars.

DLS uses these opportunities to invite guest speakers to provide insight on various legal issues. Some of the more notable guest speaker sessions centered around serving Indigenous communities, learning about the systemic barriers that they face on a day-to-day basis, and how to best recognize these barriers when providing service to our Indigenous clients. As a future lawyer, this knowledge will certainly serve me well both in my practice, and as I navigate the justice system to f ind solutions to better Canada’s access to justice issues.

Editor’s Note: The author requested to remain anonymous in order to not prejudice employment prospects.

This series by the Criminal Law Students’ Association introduces the law student body to the wild, wild world of criminal law and criminal justice.

Articles will be published in print in Ultra Vires as well as on the CLSA’s website. To pitch an article to CCC, please contact the Blog Editors, Nicholas Buhite or Anna Zhang at nicholas.buhite@ mail.utoronto.ca and as.zhang@mail.utoronto.ca, respectively.

16 | February 28, 2022

ultravires.ca

R IGHTS R EVIEW

The International Human Rights Program at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law An independent student-led publication 2021-2022 Rights Review Editorial Board Co-Editors-in-Chief: Taskeen Nawab (3L) and Sabrina Sukhdeo (3L) Senior Editors: Martha Côté (2L) and Sterling Mancuso (2L) Junior Editors: Duncan Crabtree (1L), Ally Mastantuono (1L), and Julianne Schmidt (1L) Social Media Editor: Ellen An (3L)

INDIGENOUS FISHING RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW LOOKING AT THE MI’KMAQ FISHING DISPUTE THROUGH AN INTERNATIONAL LENS

By Rhea Murti (1L) the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), a non-binding yet foundational text, clearly affirms the inherent human rights of Indigenous peoples, including the right to fish. UNDRIP explicitly states that “Indigenous Peoples have the universal right to pursue development in keeping with their needs and aspirations". As Indigenous legal scholar Jeffrey G. Hewitt has asserted, the Declaration asserts the need to create institutions that support the social, political, and legal infrastructure of Indigenous peoples. 1

MI’KMAQ FISHING RIGHTS RALLY. CREDIT: GOTOVAN.

In the fall of 2020, Canadian media was inundated with what was depicted as a clash between Indigenous and non-Indigenous fishers.

The Sipekne’katik First Nation, a Mi’kmaq band in Nova Scotia, had just launched its year-round moderate livelihood fishery, which was met with violence and property damage from both nonIndigenous commercial fishers and government officials. Today, the dispute is far from resolution, and a number of civil suits and criminal proceedings related to the 2020 incidents — including additional charges laid this January— are currently before the courts.

The commercial fishers argued that the Mi’kmaq did not have the right to fish through licenses issued by their own band as opposed to permits issued by the federal government. This sentiment was backed by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO), which proceeded to seize hundreds of Mi’kmaq lobster traps. The DFO attempted to coerce Indigenous fishers into participating in the existing commercial fishery under the Department’s regulatory authority, rather than establishing their own treatybased fishery.

This was not the first time that conflicts over Indigenous fishing rights had come to the fore.

The Mi’kmaq and other Indigenous communities across Canada and the globe have faced this struggle for generations. At a fundamental level, the issue revolves around rights—human rights, treaty rights, and Indigenous rights.

The Mi’kmaq nation’s right to fish was codified in the Peace and Friendship Treaties, which were signed in 1760 and 1761. This right, along with all other treaty and inherent Indigenous rights, was also constitutionally recognized and affirmed in

ihrprightsreview

section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. In 1993, when police arrested Mi’kmaq leader and activist Donald Marshall Jr. for a charge of illegal fishing, the Mi’kmaq community took his case to the Supreme Court of Canada, emphasizing their treaty right to fish as recognized in the Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled in favour of Marshall.

However, in doing so, the Court in R v Marshall (No. 1) stated that the Mi’kmaq right to fish is explicitly limited to the economic outcome of satisfying livelihood needs and does not extend to the purposes of wealth accumulation. No direction was provided regarding how to distinguish livelihood from wealth accumulation.

When the Sipekne’katik First Nation launched its moderate livelihood fishery to assert their recognized Indigenous, treaty, and constitutional rights exactly 21 years after Marshall, they were accused of operating an illegal fishery.

Several other Indigenous communities around the world have faced similar struggles in upholding their own fishing rights, and have had to do so without reference to national treaties or constitutional rights. In the absence of federal legislation, communities like the Saami in Norway have relied on international laws pertaining to ethnic and Indigenous rights. The Saami have invoked the International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention No. 169 regarding Indigenous peoples to argue that the government owes distinct obligations to the Saami as compared to other Norwegian fishers, since the Convention enshrines the need for preferential treatment.

Furthermore, the United Nations Declaration on

Indigenous communities draw on international agreements, such as the UNDRIP and ILO No. 169, because many countries have not yet matched the same recognition of Indigenous rights at a governmental and societal level. As marine scientist Edward H. Allison and others have explained, communities like the Tagbanua of Coron Island in the Philippines and the Māori in New Zealand have used distinctive human rights arguments to secure fishing rights as part of a wider quest for self-determination, as well as for basic human rights, including adequate food, decent work, and the right to a dignified life.2 Around the world, Indigenous fishers recognize that a failure by states to provide their citizens with these basic entitlements can legitimately be regarded as violations of international human rights law.

In this way, international human rights laws have the potential to facilitate better access to fishery resources than what is often possible under the limited scope of national legislation.

The effort of communities like the Tagbanua and the Māori is proof that international human rights have an important role to play in ensuring greater equity in fisheries management. Therefore, international human rights law and its national codification (where it exists) can be used as a basis for securing rights that states are currently neglecting.

It should be noted, however, that some scholars have argued against equating human rights and fishing rights in a literal or sweeping manner. As fisheries governance scholars Andrew M. Song and Adam Soliman explain, human rights are universal in nature, while fishing rights differentiate between rights holders and non-rights holders. They suggest that fishing rights be promoted specifically as certain human rights— such as the right to culture—to strengthen the claim of marginalized fishing groups.3 In the context of rights, therefore, the launch of the new Mi’kmaq livelihood fishery represents

ihrp.law.utoronto.ca/rights-review-homepage

much more than simply a conflict between Indigenous and commercial fishers. It is an attempt by the Mi’kmaq to assert rights to selfdetermination as enshrined in international human rights law—in particular the UNDRIP. As Indigneous legal scholar Cheryl Knockwood articulates, the importance of the UNDRIP to Indigenous communities like the Mi’kmaq extends far beyond the issue of fishing rights, as “at the heart of UNDRIP is an international recognition of the rights of Indigenous communities to selfdetermination and all that follows from that”.4 Knockwood however emphasizes that while an implementation of UNDRIP would be important, Canada needs to also give full meaning to the existing treaties signed with the Mi’kmaq, instead of continuing to litigate against Mi’kmaw individuals when they are exercising their Indigenous and treaty rights.

Mi’kmaq fishing rights are entrenched internationally in covenants such as the UNDRIP and the ILO, as well as nationally in treaties like the Peace and Friendship Treaties, federal laws like the Constitution, and jurisprudence like Marshall. The fishery established by the Sipekne’katik First Nation is an attempt to realize these rights, as well as to resist the structures of colonialism that have sought to undermine Indigenous attempts to self-govern or to practice traditional ways of being.

Fishing is therefore a powerful avenue through which Indigenous communities like the Sipekne’katik can assert their inherent and distinct rights. As these communities continue to draw on international human rights, Canada will need to keep apace with international norms by making important changes to federal law.

1. Jeffrey G. Hewitt, “Options for Implementing UNDRIP without Creating Another Empty Box,” in John Borrows et al., Braiding Legal Orders (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2019) at 59.

2. Edward H. Allison et al., “Rights-Based Fisheries Governance: From Fishing Rights to Human Rights” (2012) 13:1 Fish and Fisheries at 19.

3. Andrew M. Song and Adam Soliman, ““Situating Human Rights in the Context of Fishing Rights – Contributions and Contradictions” (2019) Marine Policy at 22.

4. Cheryl Knockwood, “UNDRIP as a Catalyst for Aboriginal and Treaty Rights Implementation and Reconciliation,” in John Borrows et al., Braiding Legal Orders (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2019) at 86.

uoftrightsreview

RIGHTS RIGHTS REVIEW REVIEW

ultravires.ca ultravires.ca

February 28, 28, 2022 2022|| 17 February 17

THE IMPLICATIONS OF FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY A DISCUSSION ON THE CHALLENGES AND TRENDS OF THIS NOVEL TECHNOLOGY

By Ally Mastantuono (1L)

our government-issued photo ID cards in a variety of contexts. The question becomes whether our privacy is infringed more by the software than it would be by an official manually comparing our photo to our face.

Facial recognition is not as obvious a violation of privacy as an invasive procedure or other form of body manipulation would be. It is perhaps more plausible to categorize it as an invasion of our right to anonymity. However, Professor Chiao is not sure whether such a right is available to us. It is these complications with the privacy argument that makes it difficult for courts, lawyers, and civil rights advocates to fight against FRT insofar as it leads to incipient authoritarianism or infringes civil liberties. Though the concerns about unconstrained use of FRT are reasonable, arguing privacy violations might not be the most effective avenue for change.

FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY. CREDIT: MIKE MACKENZIE.

In addition to being highly controversial, Facial Recognition Technology (FRT) presents our legal system with a lot of complex, interrelated challenges. Currently, it leaves us with a lot of questions—about the technical standards, regulatory laws, and democratic oversight required to ensure that our civil liberties are protected— with very few answers.

The recent panel organized by the David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights, the International Human Rights Program, and the Future of Law Lab on February 15 sought to help break down this technical, ethical, and legal quagmire.

The session made clear that tackling this issue requires a consideration of privacy, criminal, constitutional, and human rights law and that it might be more helpful to fully consider the na-

ture of the problem before trying to skip to a solution.

Professor Vincent Chiao—an associate professor at the Faculty of Law, currently serving as a visiting professor at Harvard Law School—discussed the challenges of regulating FRT through the legal framework of privacy protection. He recognized that we might be inclined to argue that government use of this technology violates our right to privacy under the Charter. The problem is that it is not obvious how it does.

Although there is something inherently unsettling about software that can detect and recognize a face, our faces are not private in the ordinary sense of the term. In fact, they are arguably the most public part of our bodies. A pertinent example of this is that we are required to show

Kate Robertson, a criminal and regulatory litigator and Fellow at the Citizen Lab, echoed the sentiment that the FRT problem does not lend itself to a simple answer. She argued that part of the reason why is the complex nature of the technology itself. FRT’s consequences in real terms are much more nuanced than those of CCTV footage, for example. The human rights law issues FRT poses, as well as the complex systems of laws that would likely apply to its use, make it stand apart.

When considering the legality of facial recognition, Robertson emphasized looking at a number of important variables. What makes a difference between a legal and illegal action in the privacy and human rights contexts is whether or not there has been compliance with a comprehensive system of checks and balances. This system informs what the appropriate boundaries of police and governmental conduct are in a

free and democratic society.

Robertson disagreed with Professor Chiao that privacy law is as limited in its current application as he seemed to suggest. She pointed to a recognition by the SCC since as early as the 1990s that privacy law must keep pace with technological developments. A recognition that what the law requires is a normatively defined set of rules that are applied contextually and responsive to changes in technology over time.

The legal oversight mechanisms that are specifically attuned to and govern wiretapping and GPS tracking provide examples of this.

While such examples can give us clues about what normative principles apply to FRT, privacy law still needs to respond and adapt to the particular issues that this technology will present.

Currently, we are in a gap period where a lack of appellate review makes it unclear how things will progress from a regulatory standpoint. The problem with this gap is that AI technology such as facial recognition can and is being experimented with without necessary infrastructure such as regulatory laws, training, and community notice. This is exacerbated by the range of available systems with different levels of accuracy and bias, and the fact that these systems in general tend to misidentify racialized and female faces.

Both Professor Chiao and Robertson agreed that the future of FRT is unknown. Whether this calls for further police and governmental experimentation, or for the implementation of moratoriums until constitutional safeguards are put into place, was left up to debate. What is clear is that in making these calls, we need to weigh the usefulness of FRT against the dangers of its unchecked use and algorithmic bias on our civil liberties and on marginalized communities.

OPINIONS

Why You Should Consider Running for the SLS A chance to create a vision for the post-pandemic law school WILLEM CRISPIN-FREI (3L) “Me? Run for SLS? Nope.” That’s what I remember thinking when I saw the Chief Returning Officer’s (CRO) email announcing that Fall 2019 nominations were open. I ignored it. Surely there were more qualified people. Surely there were students who had participated in student government during their undergrad. Surely the election was solely a popularity contest. Nonetheless, by week three, it was clear that there were changes needed at the law school, and with fewer than 24 hours remaining, I threw my hat into the ring for what turned out to be the most contested 1L election in the last seven years. Despite having been a quieter 1L, I was elected by putting forward ideas that resonated with students. I was lucky to stand for election alongside so many students who were also passionate about

improving our law school. These students have gone on to contribute to our community both on the Students’ Law Society (SLS) and through many other leadership roles.

As your outgoing SLS President, I want to encourage you to think about what you want to see in the law school. Many of us hope that next year will be a chance to rebuild the vibrant law school community ecosystem of events, gatherings, and support that pandemic restrictions have affected.

There remain many policies and practices of the law school that need revisiting, changing, or removing. Creating a vision for the post-pandemic law school will be a challenging but rewarding task that will fall to next year’s SLS. SLS advocacy and planning this year yielded policy changes regarding recorded lectures, open

book examinations, and accommodations; funding for the Upper Year Welcome Back; and hosting snack giveaways under extremely restrictive pandemic requirements. These are just some of the things we were able to achieve, but the point of this pitch is to encourage you to consider throwing your name into the ring. Whether it’s planning events and funding clubs on the Social and Finance Committee, pushing the Faculty to change its policies on the Student Life and Academic Committee, or working to coordinate the work of these two bodies on the Executive Committee, if you want to serve our community, the SLS offers many opportunities.

In 2019, I was so impressed by the quality and passion of my fellow candidates, I didn’t expect to win. I certainly didn’t expect to be President

this year. What I have learned after working with dozens of students on the SLS over the past three years is that you don’t need to have student government experience, be an SLS-incumbent, or be the most popular student in order to run for the SLS and be a successful Year Representative or Executive member. What you do need are ideas for improving our community, a desire to share those ideas, and a willingness to work towards realizing them.

Stay tuned for the CRO’s formal announcement opening nominations tomorrow and please consider throwing your hat into the ring in the 2022 SLS Spring General Election to help make our community better.

Editor’s Note: Willem Crispin-Frei is the 2021-2022 President of the Students’ Law Society.

18 | February 28, 2022

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

Where’s the Ethics and Professionalism in the 1L Ethics and Professionalism Training?

Recommendations to improve the mandatory training TAYLOR RODRIGUES (1L) I wanted to like the 1L Ethics and Professionalism Training (EPT). I like ethics. I have an undergraduate certificate in ethics and have taken an ethics course at the postgraduate level. I was excited when the 1L EPT was announced. But now I feel like the EPT was just a checkbox exercise.

All of the 1L students I spoke to in writing this article agreed that they wanted EPT training, but were disappointed with the 1L EPT. In this article, I’m going to give some ethics and professionalism advice aimed at improving the 1L EPT. Recommendation 1: Set clear expectations What is the purpose of the 1L EPT? I, nor any of the 1L or 2L students I spoke to, were confident they knew what its purpose was. The common guess was that it was to teach students practical legal ethics and professionalism norms.

In a response to my email, Assistant Dean, Academic, Sara Faherty said, “the purpose of the training is to get students thinking about ethics and professionalism very early in their legal careers.” She added that the 1L EPT helps students meet the Law Society of Ontario’s requirement that students complete 36 hours of ethical training to be eligible to write the bar admission exams.

Recommendation 2: Keep your commitments Do the 1L EPT’s sessions meet their purpose?

I cannot say they got me to think about ethics and

professionalism very much. The first and third EPT sessions felt more like equity, diversity and inclusion sessions than ethics and professionalism sessions—I didn’t even notice any explicit reference to legal ethics in the third session. The second EPT session was essentially a wellness session, which I guess could fall under professionalism.

I don’t have any issue with equity, diversity, and inclusion, or with wellness sessions (speaking in principle), or any of the EPT speakers—they all seemed well intentioned and spoke within their area of expertise. But if you told me you were going to teach me ethics and professionalism, you should teach me ethics and professionalism.

I, and all of the 1L students I spoke to in writing this article, hoped the EPT sessions would help prepare them for their 1L summer legal jobs. What’s the difference between legal information and legal advice? Is law student-client privilege a thing? The 1L EPT sessions haven’t helped me answer any of these pressing legal ethics and professionalism questions.

Recommendation 3: Set clear deadlines and instructions.

Why has the Faculty not announced deadlines or details for the two essays that students must complete as part of the 1L EPT? Is this good pedagogical practice? Surely not. After repeatedly following up, I can share that the two essays will be due on March 21, be 250 words each and that students will be able to choose among four essay questions.

Recommendation 4: Communicate clearly The 1L EPT sessions have been rescheduled multiple times. While I understand that the schedule of external speakers can be unpredictable and we are still living in a global pandemic, the Faculty could proactively communicate scheduling changes to 1L students so they can plan accordingly. It appears that 1L students are expected to constantly check the First Year Mandatory Dates webpage for changes to scheduling.

I spoke to a couple students who had to miss work shifts because they were unaware that a 1L EPT session had been moved until the day of the session when they received an email with the session’s Zoom link. Sessions have been cancelled with almost zero notice as well.

Recommendation 5: Be considerate of your clients’ and your audience’s schedules The biggest complaint I heard from 1L students in regards to the 1L EPT is when the sessions were scheduled. Scheduling an EPT session on 12:30-2:00pm, on January 19 particularly, enflamed a lot of students as applications for the 1L recruit were due the same day at 5:00pm.

This scheduling meant that I and about half of the 1L class effectively had lectures from 11:00am-5:00pm that day.

If I wanted to choose the worst possible day in the winter semester to schedule an EPT session (that did not conflict with a class) I would have chosen 12:30-2:00pm on January 19.

Now, 1L students knew about both the 1L recruit application deadline and the January 19

EPT session weeks in advance, but even law students are not immune to procrastination. Why would you schedule a mandatory wellness session right before the 1L recruit application deadline if you wanted students to pay attention?

At the January 19 session, a student mentioned it was very poorly scheduled and Associate Dean Faherty responded that “every week is busy” and that previously students had recommended that these sessions be held early in the winter semester.

Did the Faculty just not realize they scheduled an EPT session on the date of the 1L recruit application deadline or did they not care? At one point the January 28 EPT session was scheduled to conflict with my 90-person contracts class, so I must confess that I do not have confidence that these dates were chosen with care.

Recommendation 6: Don’t be tone deaf The January 19 EPT session came across as tone deaf. First, it always comes across as tone deaf when institutional actors (U of T) suggest personal solutions to institutional problems (law students’ mental health).

Second, giving me impossible advice is not helpful. Reminding me to break for lunch and take frequent walks throughout the day is not helpful when I’m forced to attend mandatory sessions over my lunch time and have effectively six hours of straight Zoom some days because lecturers often run over time.

These are just a few recommendations on how to improve the EPT sessions. Hopefully, future EPT sessions will take this into consideration and actually deliver on ethics and professionalism.

Standardizing the 1L Curriculum A one-size-fits-all model might not be the best solution EMILY HEAN (1L) There’s a level of standardization to the 1L curriculum for sure. Everyone starts with Legal Methods, has LRW in f irst semester, and takes the same core courses. The problem, with those other core classes, is the way they’re scheduled.

We’ve all heard it from a professor at least once: “Did you guys take X class last semester?” The question is met with nods, ‘no’s, and shrugs until the professor f inally sighs and says something along the lines of, “It’s so much harder to teach when you don’t all have the same background.”

Legal Process, for example, requires at least a rudimentary understanding of a number of classes, including criminal and constitutional law. I was one of a lucky bunch who had both classes last semester; I can’t person-

ally attest to whether or not there is a benef it to it, but I do feel like they gave me a good basis for legal knowledge in general.

Other substantive courses seem to go hand in hand, as well. Torts and contracts, for example, have many similarities, and studying them side by side may be benef icial for the understanding of both classes.

However, we run into a logistical problem pretty quickly when trying to ensure every student takes the same classes in f irst and second semester. Would that result in larger lectures, or in more offerings of the same subject?

The other problem is our small groups.

Personally, my small group has been invaluable to my 1L experience; it’s how I made the majority of my friends, a chance to really get

to know a professor, have a mentor-mentee relationship, and an opportunity to take a more detailed look at certain cases. I would not trade small groups for anything; I think there’s something so important about them.

Many other students have expressed similar sentiments about their own small groups— losing them would be a small tragedy. So how do we continue with the small group model, while still standardizing the curriculum?

The easy answer would be to have every small group study the same subject. But then the question becomes, which subject do we choose? Is there one subject, over all others, which should be looked at for the entire year, rather than just one semester?

My instincts would say Legal Process. It makes sense—exploring the subject in a small

group setting means you could then bring in other disciplines. But that doesn’t necessarily work either, given that Legal Process is weighted less than the core subjects, and making it a small group class would give it the most weight. So then what? We choose one of the core subjects and make that the small group subject for every 1L? It doesn’t make sense from a scheduling or a staff ing standpoint.

So, unfortunately, while the current system leads to holes in learning, confusion amongst students, and frustration for professors, there doesn’t seem to be a workable alternative right now. The only solace for current 1Ls is that by second year, at least we’ll all have taken the same classes, and hopefully have learned the same important concepts… right?

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

February 28, 2022 | 19

Shading in the Supreme Court Justice Mahmud Jamal’s appointment and the significance of diversity on the Court MITHUSHAN KIRUBANANTHAN (2L) Justice Mahmud Jamal’s appointment to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) marked a momentous achievement for representation. He is the Court’s first member of a visible minority group and also its first adherent of the Baháʼí Faith. The move was largely celebrated, and for good reason—the colour of a person’s skin and the faith they hold invariably influence their sense of judgement.

Thus, embracement of diversity can imbue an institution with perspectives, experiences, and considerations that it might not otherwise have had.

The nation’s highest court is surely not immune to this type of enrichment, and so the legal community—and particularly the contingents of that community belonging to a racial and/or religious minority—is undoubtedly curious to see what Justice Jamal will contribute to the Supreme Court Stone Soup.

The appointment is also expected to increase “confidence in the justice system,” as some have said; by now, that phrase is branded in every law student’s head, but is perhaps too mechanical to accurately capture the stakes. Justice is a result, not a process, and so perhaps what we’re really asking is, “Can we trust the Canadian legal system to give us justice?” Surely a semantic difference, but a significant one. Consider ability and image, two components integral to building confidence.

Courts are not infallible, and indeed, we can assume every legal system will have its share of poorly-reasoned judgements, overly insensitive or preju-

dicial ones, and rulings that contort the law to lend credence to idiosyncrasies and personal bias.

Though we tolerate this to some degree, in recognition that even poor judgements may serve a purpose, a steady stream of unacceptable or offensive decisions will chip away at the confidence people have in their courts.

Degradation of trust in the judiciary may also be achieved wherever a population, either whole or in part, believes the system is not built, willing, or able to do right by them. Image informs perception, and so the makeup of the SCC sends a message before it ever pens a word. What is the message, precisely?

To a coloured person, a queer person, a person with unconventional faith, it may be that they will not in fact be judged by their peers, in the truest sense.

Consider this. In the 145 years between its conception and July 1, 2021, the SCC had an all-white bench. Not one of its 90 justices have been queer, at least openly, and it took until 1970, the year of Justice Bora Laskin’s appointment, for a non-Christian to sit on the bench. How could an outsider not be intimidated?

There are certainly those who, despite belonging to one or more minority groups, rarely feel as though they’ve been marginalized and have no problem with the legal system as it is. I suspect the opposite holds true for many more. The level of confidence inspired in those people seems to depend on their answer to the following question: can we be sure the legal system will take us seriously

enough for us to take it seriously? As a visible minority, I can tell you I anticipate courts will treat me with less fairness. I expect the judge to be an adversary, equivalent to opposing counsel. Is this what the kids call paranoia? Am I being too presumptuous? Perhaps it may seem that way, but the sentiment is not unfounded.

How can you be sure a court will do justice by the experiences, circumstances, and all else that shape your unique identity and membership within a given community, when that court has never had the benefit of seeing through the eyes of someone like you? At what point does impartiality act as a disguise for ignorance? Unless we contend that judges are remarkable modern-day Übermensch, capable of removing their humanity from their ideals and reason entirely, we must accept that they express, in some way, their personal preferences, importing the totality of their life lessons to inform their judgement. When an institution is dominated by people cut from the same cloth, holes can be found everywhere. And though there have been instances where judges ruled contrary to their instincts and personal philosophies, that does little to placate perception. For example, a teacher who, in their spare time, donates to a movement organized by white supremacists may very well treat everyone in their classroom with respect, but it would be unrealistic to believe perception of the former action will or should not seep into and colour the latter. An assurance of impartiality, on its own, is not enough

to establish a sense of security in society’s marginalized factions. In extreme instances, as in my unfortunate teacher hypothetical, it may have the exact opposite effect.

That is precisely why Justice Jamal’s appointment is important. Not only is it a chink in the status quo, it’s a significant marking point in the barometer of our nation’s commitment to diversity at the highest level. It’s a step in the right direction, but make no mistake—it does not abracadabra away embedded fears and deep-rooted distrust. It will take time, continuous reflection, and considerable effort for the SCC to engender confidence in those it has historically overlooked and mistreated. And of course, there is still much room for improvement.

Is it an oversight, for example, that despite having history in the country spanning nearly four centuries, no Black-Canadian has been appointed to the SCC? Or that, somehow, for all the talk of reconciliation and recognition of alternative legal systems, no Indigenous person has ever been appointed? Let’s call a spade a spade. These are embarrassing, grievous omissions.

The appointment of Justice Jamal is a type of vindication, a significant foothold in a looming cliff.

But there are many perspectives, stories, and ideologies that have not yet reached the other side of the bench. We’ve advanced just a little closer to the peak, but there’s a lot left to do to continue the upwards climb.

The Accidental Utility of Vaccine Skepticism Inciting critical discussions about anti-corruption in procurement NIK KHAKHAR (2L) Over the last three weeks, we have been witnessing monumental events in our ostensibly perpetual history textbook chapter of COVID-19. Thousands of individuals have marched and occupied in major cities across the country – the longest being in Ottawa – to protest provincial and federal vaccine mandates.1 While some have expressed displeasure at lockdowns and vaccine mandates despite acknowledging the need for a vaccine, others remain concerned about long-term side effects and the lack of transparency by federal and provincial governments about the considerations that went into the procurement process.

Indeed, vaccines have been proven safe and effective, and are one of our most powerful tools in stemming the severest impacts of the pandemic.

Moreover, the protest has, in many ways, now gone beyond the parameters of peaceful assembly, extending to illegal occupation causing the arrests of many organizers of the Freedom Convoy. While this will be an inquiry sought by scholars in the years to come, the concerns surrounding the safety and effectiveness of vaccines are themselves symptomatic of the need for additional attention towards anti-corruption law in the premarket and regulatory stages of vaccine development. Since evaluations of government legitimacy are predicated on the public trust, it is essential that citizens are provided with more information about the safeguards and pitfalls that characterize Canada’s anti-corruption apparatus, as it relates to the manufacturing, procurement, and distribution of our vaccines.

Lobbying Firstly, concerns can be traced to the fault lines within Canada’s Lobbying Act, specifically the considerable latitude it provides to in-house lobbyists.

Per the Act, lobbying is defined as any written or oral communication with a public office holder concerning a government decision. However, the type of communication that constitutes lobbying depends on the nature of the organization. Consultant lobbyists, such as individuals at a firm, are required to register as lobbyists if they communicate with a public office holder regarding the development of legislation, bills, amendments, policies, and

proposals; the awarding of grants or benefits; and the awarding of any contract. In-house lobbyists– which can include pharmaceutical companies–are subject to notably less restrictions and only having to register if a significant part of their duties goes into lobbying. Importantly, for corporations and organizations, registration is not required if they engage in discussions regarding the awarding of federal contracts. Since contract-related discussions do not fall within the definition of in-house lobbying, corporate employees who are former public office holders can utilize their connections and power in such communications without scrutiny–an ability not shared by consultant lobbyists, who cannot engage in contract-related government discussions if they held public office within the last five years.

The reduced restrictions of in-house lobbyists can allow companies to influence public officials through nepotism or prior connections in the government. In a public health crisis, the absence of fair market practices can translate into inflated prices, bypassing quality assurance measures, and the erosion of public trust in the safety and efficacy of a vaccine. By ensuring that the restrictions of inhouse lobbyists are expanded to include discussions related to tender bids, public trust in the research and development, administration, and procurement of vaccines can be increased.

Conflicts of Interest In addition to the loopholes in the Lobbying Act, there are concerns surrounding legislation aiming to prevent conflicts of interest in the procuring of vaccines. The urgency of needs in public emergencies like COVID-19 create opportunities for such conflicts due to the need for increased flexibility and speed in the process. Government officials can take advantage of the urgency by seeking kickbacks, and suppliers can attempt to leverage urgency by seeking prices for pharmaceutical products that are much higher than the market value.

These concerns have been highlighted in the Conflict of Interest Act. Section 6(1) prohibits public office holders from making or participating in the making of a decision that would place them in a conflict of interest. Because the Conflict of Interest Act

targets office holders who are influenced by family and other personal connections, it remedies the asymmetry between in-house and consultant lobbyists regarding contract-related discussions. However, its focus on actual, rather than perceived conflicts of interest does not effectively gain public trust. As seen in the 2020 WE Charity scandal, conflicts of interest that are implied, rather than expressly proven, may escape the ambit of the statute.

Fortunately, these shortcomings have been recognized by the Canadian government in regards to the approval and procurement of vaccines. In September 2020, the COVID-19 Vaccine Task Force made the decision to publicize conflict of interest disclosures, whether real or perceived. This measure was taken in response to the increasing distrust of the vaccine, and aimed to provide transparency to Canadians about government interactions with pharmaceutical companies. Given the increased recognition that Canadians want to be informed about both real and perceived conflicts of interest, it is hoped that the Conflict of Interest Act will be amended to address these concerns.

Procurement and Debarment Finally, public confidence in the vaccine procurement process is largely reliant on existing debarment policies.2 Canada’s current debarment framework is governed by the Ineligibility and Suspension Policy. The debarment policy ensures that companies that violate anti-corruption legislation – including the Lobbying Act and anti-kickback statutes – are disqualified from contracting with the federal government. This is aimed to deter malfeasant business conduct and promote public confidence, since the condemnation of unlawful acts sends a message to the public that corruption is, altogether, a deal breaker in public-private partnerships. Unlike the United States, where debarment may not be imposed if there is compelling need based on government interests, Canadian debarment policy is regarded as “mandatory”, subject to emergency and national security exceptions. Within the context of COVID-19 vaccine procurement decisions, this is not difficult to imagine; indeed, the need to

ensure rapid access to life-saving technology may justify contracting with debarred companies, despite the concerns that would ordinarily surround their participation.

The emergency exceptions of Canadian debarment policy have their own concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the increased skepticism about the legitimacy of emergency powers, as evidenced by ongoing protests and Parliamentary debates, the decision of the federal government to invoke any exceptions may run the contrary consequence of reducing public trust. One only needs to look as far as social media to see the outrage that often accompanies the use of emergency legislation.

It will be interesting to see whether – and how – such concerns will be addressed within the debarment process.

Conclusion As seen, there are fault lines in Canadian legislation that run the risk of fostering corruption in government-pharmaceutical transactions. Although individuals who are against vaccines may not change their stance, the outrage in major cities since Saturday has been symptomatic of a widespread lack of trust in the government’s response to COVID-19. With amendments to anti-corruption policies that promote transparency and integrity in the procurement process, it is hoped that trust in the life-saving technology of COVID-19 vaccines can be increased.

1. It must be acknowledged that many protestors, including some organizers, were actively engaged in harmful expression, including the waving of Nazi and Confederate flags, the uttering of racist remarks, and the blocking of first responders from their duties. I strongly condemn and abhor such actions. The focus of this article is specifically the mistrust about vaccines, and its role in evaluating anticorruption policies regarding their procurement.

2. Elizabeth Acorn, “Just a business decision? Debarment in public procurement in Canada and the United States,” (2021) 64:2 Canadian Public Administration 238 at 240.

20 | February 28, 2022

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

Words v Actions: The Case of Mental Health at U of T Law

The Faculty’s actions do not live up to their words DONYA ASHNAEI (1L) Law school is known to be a challenging and competitive environment. Incoming law students are warned to brace themselves for three years of endless readings, little sleep, and no social life. These struggles are seen as a rite of passage within the legal community.

This mentality stems from the idea that if you survive the crushing pressure of law school, you will be ready to take on any challenge in your career. The legal community is becoming increasingly aware of the harms of this ideology, particularly when it comes to mental health. What use is a new lawyer, freshly graduated from Canada’s top law school, if they are burnt out?

The University of Toronto Faculty of Law has gone to great lengths to portray itself as a champion for mental health and wellness.

The Faculty’s JD Student Mental Health Strategic Action Plan ref lects a well-thoughtout mental health and wellness policy that would benef it students. The Strategic Plan explicitly states that the Faculty identif ies mental health as a priority and asserts that their objective is “to take a systemic approach to creating a supportive and inclusive environment for students…. [that] includes understanding the underlying stressors associated with poor student mental health, [emphasis added].”

Unfortunately, the Faculty’s actions do not live up to their words. The school has consistently refused to stand by the systemic approach to tackling mental health that they emphasized in their Strategic Plan, despite pleas from students. In the same breath, the Faculty claims to care about students’ mental health while propagating the systems that are detrimental to it.

A Pattern of Undue Stress On December 15, 2021—the evening before three f inal exams were set to take place—students received an email saying

that exams would be shifting to an online model. The school’s communication on this issue was vague and inconsistent. Students were left in the dark about what their exams would look like, whether they would be rescheduled, and how students could be accommodated.

One student who asked for clarif ication regarding wif i connectivity and printing capabilities was met with a dismissive response that did not answer the questions asked.

When another student asked if any extra time would be allotted for technological issues and to print exams at home, the Faculty responded that they should read the questions while waiting for the exam to print.

Unfortunately, these are not isolated examples. The Faculty has demonstrated a pattern of refusing to address the underlying causes of students’ poor mental health.

In one class, students were assigned 190 pages of readings in one week, which is above the amount recommended by the school’s own academic handbook. When students reached out to Associate Dean Christopher Essert about this breach, he dismissed the volume of readings as reasonable and emphasized that the guidelines were not enforceable due to academic freedom concerns.

This was discouraging to students in the class who reported feeling “overwhelmed” and “hopeless.” Associate Dean Essert’s response was particularly disappointing, especially in the face of student consultations by the Dean’s Mental Health Committee’s f inding that reading volume is one of the leading contributors of poor mental health among students.

Even if professors followed the guidelines, students could have up to 600 pages of readings a week—an unrealistic and unmanageable expectation. As SLS Vice-President Student Life Vanshika Dhawan (3L) remarked, “It’s simply not possible to complete every single reading in 1L, given the number of co-

curricular and job-related de facto requirements… and retain a good mental and physical well-being.” The Faculty’s failure to take action on this issue signals to students that its stance on mental health is purely performative.

The Paradox of Programming At times, the Faculty’s attempts at helping students has aggravated mental health issues even further. In January, the school scheduled a mandatory “mental health and wellness” training session for 1Ls during their lunch block on the same day that 1L recruit applications were due. Most students had back-to-back classes that day and were already overwhelmed. Ironically, this mental health and wellness session harmed students more than it helped. One student shared that his mental health would have benef ited from a break from staring at a screen and the time to eat lunch.

The mandatory mental health session highlights the school’s tendency to favour individualistic, small-scale solutions instead of standing by the systemic approach to tackling mental health that it preaches. When students shared that they felt overwhelmed by the timing of the session, it was recommended they “put on a pair of jeans,” “take a walk,” or “brush their teeth with their nondominant hand” to promote ref lection.

This is not the only time the Faculty has stressed individual-focused solutions to mental health challenges. They also refer students to their embedded counsellor, hold mental health off ice hours, and offer Mindful Moments Yoga. While mental health strategies like these can be helpful to an extent, their impact is minimal when compared to the effects of more holistic and systemic changes. The challenges facing students’ mental health at law school are serious and deeply ingrained; they must be addressed at

both an individual and systemic level.

Actions Over Words In general, the school’s approach to mental health continues to be reactive rather than proactive. The Faculty accepts that the law school’s systems are designed to elicit poor mental health outcomes for students.

Their mental health and wellness programming attempts to improve student mental health once it has already deteriorated. Instead, they should identify and eliminate the factors that are causing poor mental health in the f irst place.

A proactive approach to tackling mental health would lead to better outcomes because students wouldn’t constantly be trying to recover from poor mental health. As with any other health issue, it is more effective to prevent a problem from occurring than attempting to resolve it once it has already occurred.

And if the problem does occur, it is best to treat the cause, not just the symptoms.

In general, the Faculty would benef it from listening to students' concerns regarding mental health policies and programming.

They should address the underlying causes of student stress, such as unmanageable readings, uncompassionate policies for remote learning, lack of communication when it comes to changes due to COVID-19, and the unhealthy mentality surrounding grades and recruits.

Over the past couple of weeks, the Faculty has taken a step in the right direction by announcing that they will be allowing recorded lectures and hard drive access on f inal exams. This being said, there is still a lot of work to be done. The Faculty should ensure that its programs and initiatives ref lect its stated commitment to addressing the systemic causes of poor mental health.

After all, actions speak louder than words.

Should I Work in Law School?

The answer, like many things in law, is that it depends EMILY HEAN (1L) It’s a question you see constantly on law school forums: should I work in law school? Will I be able to have a job in 1L? And the answer is always the same: it depends.

There are a lot of different factors to consider when deciding whether or not to work: your course load (and class schedule!), the flexibility of the job, your mental health, and what the job is.

For me, working in law school wasn’t always the plan. In fact, after having worked multiple jobs throughout my final year of my undergrad, I was determined not to work during 1L so that I would have time to focus on my studies. These plans changed after I received several compelling job opportunities the summer before starting school. One, an internship with the Forest of Reading, was a dream position for me, and I

knew I’d kick myself if I didn’t take it. The other two spilled over from the summer, and luckily both ended in September (working three jobs simultaneously during that first month felt like a different kind of hell!).

Job opportunities seemed to keep popping up throughout the school year, leading to me working as an editor for a professor and part-time for a small law firm. While the former is fairly flexible, the latter is a scheduled job, leading to some difficulties in scheduling around classes and accounting for commute times.

Flexibility seems to be the key to working in law school. We all are familiar with the chaos: classes, mandatory 1L sessions, bundle teachings, webinars, and everything else that fills up our day-to-day lives. For some, freelancing might be

the answer—you are your own boss, setting your own prices, and choosing your own schedule.

Vivian Cheng (3L) began freelancing after her 2L summer. “After learning about Fiverr, I thought it would be cool to sell services there,” she said. “By chance, an acquaintance asked me to edit his admissions essays this summer and that got the ball rolling. I saw an opportunity to use my years of editing experience to provide value for others, and I went for it.”

Unfortunately for Vivian, her freelancing experience went off to a rocky start. She chose to set a fixed payment, which didn’t work for every project she did, leading to burnout. I can relate to that—spending more time than expected on a project can lead to stress, loss of sleep, and just general unpleasant feelings about the work.

However, after creating a pamphlet explaining her services, and creating templates to streamline her interactions with customers, Vivian found her freelancing work much more sustainable. She highly endorses the experience, saying, “Beyond flexibility and autonomy, the ability to capitalize on your own brand is an unparalleled feeling.”

I share the sentiment, and extend it to capitalizing on one’s own skills—working a job during law school is not impossible. In fact, if you find a job that interests you, expands on your skills, and teaches you things, it is one of the best learning experiences you can have in your legal education career.

So: should you work in 1L? I say, why not?

OPINIONS

ultravires.ca

February 28, 2022 | 21

How To Manage Relationships In Law School Is that love or sleep deprivation in the air?

VIVIENNE STERN (1L) Va lent ine's Day is st ressfu l for anyone, regard less of whet her you are involved in a romant ic relat ionsh ip or have what feels l i ke years of read ings to catch up on. A nd relat ionsh ips are hard— w it h fr iendsh ips somet imes being t he most d if f icu lt. So whet her you are look ing for some lastm inute Va lent ine’s date ideas (Ga lent ine’s and Guyent ine’s dates a lso welcome), t ips to keep t he romance a l ive, or just fun t h ings to do w it h a fr iend, I have you covered.

Tip #1 - Use Technology T h is is an old ie but a good ie. Use Facet ime, Messenger, or any ot her v ideo ca l ling ser v ice t hat you can get your hands on. Seeing your par t ner's or fr iend’s face ma kes a world of d if ference —ta ke it from someone who has done four years on and

of f-long d istance. T he ca l l can be t wo m inutes or t wo hours. Maybe you want to work toget her in si lence (a handy t r ick for law school st udents who are too busy to ma ke a t r ip), eat a mea l, or catch up before bed. T he point is t hat it a l lows you to commun icate w it h a face, not just a text message.

Tip #2 - Spice it up!

No, I don't mean spice it up in t he way you're t h in k ing! R at her, ta ke it in t he l itera l sense. Cook in your k itchen. Ever yone needs to eat, and spend ing t ime w it h someone impor tant to you does not need to be unproduct ive. A s a law st udent, t hese t y pes of “ double aspect” act iv it ies are r ight up my a l ley and are somet h ing my par t ner and I do often! W het her it is mea l prepping or f ind ing a new recipe, t he

k itchen is a g reat opt ion. Want to up t he ante? O pen a bott le of w ine, put on some good t unes (check out t h is issue’s U V playl ist), add a novelt y apron, and you are set!

Tip #3 - Add An Unknown Element I f you are doing long d istance — wh ich in my opin ion m ight act ua l ly be t he better way to have a relat ionsh ip in law school (more on t h is later) — or l iv ing in t he same cit y, an un k now n element a lways ma kes t h ings interest ing. T he best date idea (ro mant ic or ot her w ise) I have heard as of late is to do a bl ind order for your par t ner on U ber Eats. L et me ex pla in more fu l ly: each person chooses a random d ish from a restaurant on U ber Eats and sh ips it to t he ot her person w it hout tel l ing t hem t he cuisine. You t hen open t he packages toget her, t hrough Facet ime or in person, and have a

mea l. You can pick a t heme or set r u les (such as t he d ish needs to star t w it h t he letter “ V ”), but it is a g reat way to t r y somet h ing new.

To end of f t h is ar t icle, I have a hotta ke. A s I a l luded to earl ier, I bel ieve t hat long- d istance is t he idea l relat ionsh ip stat us in law school— or at least t hat t here is a si lver l in ing to it. Being in law school is ex haust ing. T here is an end less amount of read ing, rev iew, and summar y notes.

Hav ing t ime to shower, let a lone be invested in anot her person, can be a lot to ask. T he si lver l in ing? T he long- d istance a l lows you to more or less schedu le your “relat ionsh ip t ime” to be in l ine w it h school and read ings. So don’t let t he d istance stop you. Plus, it means you don’t a lways need to br ing your par t ner to t hose insuf ferable law school par t ies we a l l k now and love.

Reflections on Fostering a Dog Dog fostering can make you more empathetic VIVIAN CHENG (3L)

MEET ROCKY! CREDIT: VIVIAN CHENG

I don’t know how, but the pandemic has heightened my affection for dogs. Although I am mildly sleep-deprived because of my foster dog, giving him a temporary home has 100 percent been worth it.

My foster pup Rockford (aka Rocky) is a senior rescue. Despite his age, Rocky is a spry boy who loves going on walks and begging for food. On many accounts, he acts like any other dog. He is, however, impressively calm around people and impressively erratic around other animals.

Despite Rocky being generally well-behaved, he has upset me at times. During the first week of his stay, he would sometimes nip at me when I picked him up or pet him. These moments not only shocked me but hurt my feelings, as I took his aggression to be an expression of contempt. I began backing off from Rocky, carrying him only when necessary and petting him only when approached. I might be a touch dramatic, but Rocky disliking me weighed heavily on my selfesteem.

However, I soon noticed that Rocky has impaired hearing, at least partially so. Given his background as a stray, the volunteer organization and I didn’t know much about his medical history. Nonetheless, Rocky’s hearing impairments became clear when he did not react to neighbouring dogs’ barking, vacuuming efforts, or calls of his name. Although I initially thought Rocky was astonishingly calm, or even mildly dense, I soon realized that his hearing impairment precluded him from interpreting the world through sound.

Importantly, I realized he couldn’t hear my footsteps when I approached him. This information contextualized his seemingly aggressive behaviour. Rocky’s attempts to bite me were not acts of aggression per se, but more likely acts of shock. Because he could not hear me, my efforts to make contact startled him. With this in mind, I knew I could make behavioural changes to make him feel more welcome and secure.

From that point on, I caught Rocky’s attention before picking him up. I also stopped petting him from behind. He stopped biting me in response.

We soon developed a close bond, and he soon began following me everywhere—even waiting by the door when I left my apartment! Because he could not hear much, he overwhelmingly relied on his vision to observe me. Despite Rocky being unable to verbally communicate with me, my newfound understanding allowed me to understand more of his communicative cues.

I have now fostered Rocky for a little under a month. He has been the sweetest boy, and we have had amazing experiences together, from daily walks and hikes, to nightly cuddles. Importantly, he has been so much more than a cute dog. Rocky has taught me an important lesson in making assumptions. We tend to judge others or grow frustrated when individuals behave in ways that deviate from the norm—and we shouldn’t.

With some patience and empathy, we can identify why someone might act in ways we aren’t accustomed to. We can also make small but impactful changes to make someone feel more welcome. And finally, we can bring the best out of

others if we offer spaces that allow them to flourish. Rocky has shown me that.

Ultimately, dogs are creatures who show you just how much impact your actions can have.

Rocky went from being a scared, startled boy to an affectionate one within a few days due to a few small changes in my habits.

Although Rocky is by no means perfectly behaved, I can now more easily distinguish between actual misbehaviour and when he’s just reacting in a certain way due to his impairments.

As a senior gentleman, I know Rocky may have more ailments. However, if I come across them, I will be patient before jumping to conclusions.

If you can, I would highly recommend fostering a dog. While law school is undoubtedly busy, you learn invaluable skills from taking care of an animal in need. I believe developing this kind of patience and empathy will serve you well in the legal profession.

Editor’s Note: Since writing this article, Rocky has been adopted. Yay!

DIVERSIONS

22 | February 28, 2022

ultravires.ca

Pick Up Lines for Your Law Law School Crush Love Law-themed pick up lines Poetry sure to melt any law student’s heart

HARRY MYLES (2L) IN COLLABORATION WITH @LAW_MEMES_FOR_TEENS Even though Valentine’s Day has come and gone, it’s not too late to shoot your shot with your law school crush. Check out these tried and true pick up lines to get the conversation going!

Shout out to the best law school meme page around for their contributions!

1. I wanna be Haldane you all night ;).

5. I would take a “falling scale on a train platform that recently experienced a firework detonation” for you.

6. I find you appeal-ing.

7. My passion for you is res ipsa loquitor.

8. Are you the McGill Guide, ‘cause I’d be lost without you.

2. You’re like an upper year summary, I can’t live without you.

3. Would you like to enjoy village cricket in the summertime with me?

4. Are you the holding of a case, ‘cause I’ve been looking all night for you.

9. Want to spend all night searching CanLii by the Fishbowl fireplace?

10. I’d reopen Goodmans Café for you.

11. Would you like my outlines?

12. I love you as much as Lord Denning loves cricket.

U of T Law’s Confession Column Your secrets are in…

SAUCIEST INTRUDER We asked and you answered. From secret admirers to showing appreciation for others at school, here is what U of T Law’s student body had to say.

L ove is in the air…

“Someone came into my life last semester and changed it for the better There were fireworks (and falling scales) whenever we were together.

I can’t give and take, live and let live When I have so much love for him that I want to give.

When I was with him I got dizzy like there was a snail in my drink It was not reasonably foreseeable that this is how deep I would sink.

If he was my Valentine I’d be the happiest I’ve ever been Call me a tortfeasor because I’m in love with the Associate Dean.”

Haikus, limericks, and more for the law student FIEVEL LIM (1L)

Love Poems Roses are red, Violets are blue, You’re here in the law library, Can I study with you?

HHs are high, LPs are low, You have distinction, Let me be your [date]?

Con law is cool, Property is great, But my eyes are on you, And upon you I wait.

Ha ikus “Shoutout to Branden Cave (3L) for always wishing everyone HBD on Facebook!!”

“I'm so lucky to know Alannah Safnuk (3L).

She's a fantastic friend, and has gotten me through some rough times.”

“Dahlia Horlick (2L) is my whole reason for coming to school. She is the smartest, prettiest, and has the hottest takes of all!”

“Sophie Zhao (3L) is a perfect mix of brilliant and compassionate. Every time we talk I feel like I'm a better person for it.”

“Amy Yun (2L) is so bad I would drop my job lined up at Bay St. just to smell her hair.”

“Jessie Cartoon (2L) is basically a superhero.

There is genuinely nothing this girl can't do and she inspires me every day.”

“Sabina Haque’s (2L) smile makes me melt.”

“Raphael An’s (2L) arms look like a delicious dessert”

“I have a rule against dating men in law, but I would risk it all for Niblett.”

“Mack Faulkner (2L) is an absolute turbo bird”

“I'm doing great but I miss her so much it hurts. I really messed up.”

“Shoutout to Evan Linn (3L) for being a good friend who only makes fun of me a little when I say something silly.”

A shout out to some special someones

“Oh Ellie Ellie / I remember our first Hello /

Oh Hello Elo-Elo-Eloise / when I see you, I feel like a happy breeze / Like New Orleans feels about Drew Brees / Butterflies in my belly, when I think about you I get weak in the knees//”

A controversial take “Judge Andrews is better than Judge Cardozo, sorry not sorry. If you know, you KNOW.” “I'm in 1L. I've been considering transferring to a different law school. Sitting through lackluster classes from profs with terrible pedagogy and pointless ethics and professionalism training has made me realize: studying law will probably be as equally miserable at any other school, but I might as well save money in the process.”

It’s Valentine’s Day. You are looking like a snack Over this Zoom class.

Hey, you look pretty.

I’m free after contracts class.

Meet at the Fishbowl?

Limer icks There once was a student in law school Who thought he was surprisingly cool.

But on Valentine’s Day His crush turned him away.

No dating in law school was her rule.

And someone who will not take a break!

I noticed a student in Torts class

“Zoom breakout room hack: spend 2 minutes talking about whatever you're supposed to and the rest of the time just making small talk and meeting new people—getting that networking in baby!”

Well today is the day

Can you guess the show?

Donoghue drank a bottle of scare.

“This 2L was nearly on everyone’s favourite reality romance show...He declined because of "a torn knee" ;D”

And it was unlawful,

Who looks like she gets HH en masse.

I go to her and say “I think you have a really nice [face].”

Stevenson owed a duty of care.

It must have been awful, But not having you is my nightmare.

DIVERSIONS

ultravires.ca

February 28, 2022 | 23

Introduction to Oral (Hygiene) Advocacy “For educational purposes only” PAUL MOHAN (2L) T he fol low ing is for educat iona l purposes on ly and shou ld not be ta ken as med ica l adv ice. For any quest ions, please see your hea lt h care professiona l.

Strong First Impression W hen you wa l k into t he cour t room or t ur n on your webcam for v ir t ua l cour t, t he f irst t h ing t hat people are going to no t ice is not your clot hes, but your teet h.

Many people are concer ned t hat t heir teet h do not look wh ite enough. T hey use t he paper test, where you sm i le in a m ir ror and hold up a piece of paper beside it, to judge how wh ite t heir teet h are. I recommend using t he Cr im ina l Code because t here is an appropr iate amount of wh itecol lar cr ime t inged w it h enough g r it to g ive a nat ura l look, un l i ke t he unnat ura l wh iteness you’d be compar ing to from a L ord Denn ing judg ment.

I f t he end less days of cof fee wh i le doing

your read ings fol lowed by t he end less n ights of red w ine because of your readings have ta ken t heir tol l on your teet h, t here are opt ions. I a lways recommend professiona l wh iten ing per for med in a denta l of f ice for best resu lts; however, I recog n ize t he t ime (and cost) is somet h ing t hat, as st udents, we m ight not be able to af ford. W h iten ing toot hpastes can be usefu l for sur face sta ins as t hey work by being more abrasive t han reg u lar toot hpaste.

Somet imes t he sta ins go deeper and in t hose cases wh iten ing st r ips w i l l be t he best solut ion. A l l for ms of wh iten ing can ma ke your teet h more sensit ive so care shou ld be ta ken.

Convincing Arguments You may craft t he best arg uments for your case, but you won’t be able to get t hrough t hem if your breat h st in k s. You probably k now t hat br ush ing your teet h

t wo to t hree t imes a day is impor tant, especia l ly a fter eat ing d iscounted post-Va lent ine’s Day chocolates and candy. Not ever yone k nows t hough, t hat you a lso need to br ush your tong ue. Br ush ing your tong ue does a good job, but if you want to elevate yoursel f from t he Cour t of Appea l to t he SCC , t he use of a tong ue scraper w i l l ma ke your breat h fresher t han our latest school scanda l.

Strong Foundation You may lear n t he l ingo and k now how to f lour ish your arg ument to ma ke it ap pea l ing, but w it hout a st rong foundat ion, your case w i l l fa l l apar t. Sim i larly, you can have t he best-look ing teet h in t he world, but if you don’t ta ke care of your g ums, your teet h w i l l fa l l out any ways.

T h is is why you need to f loss ever y day and create a st rong foundat ion for your teet h. Trad it iona l f loss is best to use, but

Intra Vires

Totally real news from a partiallyreopened Faculty of Law HARRY MYLES (2L)

Five-let ter word g uessing ga me momenta r ily dist racts the count r y f rom the deter ioration of ou r societ y A m idst occupy ing t r uckers wav ing confederate f lags, a dead ly pandem ic, and t he sou l- cr ush ing an x iet y of cl imate change, t he world ex per ienced a br ief respite in t he for m of Word le. Tr y ing to get t hose f ive g reen t i les to f l ip over managed to momentar i ly d ist ract from t he dumpster f ire of our world. A nd t hen t he New York T imes bought it and * m ight * keep it free-to -play, so glad to see capita l ism is st i l l a l ive and wel l.

Police across the count r y ask convoyers to pret t y please move thei r t r ucks A fter v iolent ly remov ing I nd igenous land defenders for decades, pol ice across t he count r y decided to ta ke a d ifferent approach w it h insur rect ion ist t r uckers. I nstead, of f icia ls asked t he squatters to prett y please stop t he hon k ing and maybe move t heir veh icles, if it’s not too much to ask?

Law st udents prepa re a convoy of BM Ws in the Jackma n pa rking lot to dema nd the reopening of Goodma ns Ca fé A fter t he recent wave of veh icle-t hemed protests in t h is

count r y, severa l st udents are prepar ing to ta ke over t he Jack man park ing lot and demand a reopen ing of t he beloved Good mans Café. Ot hers proposed a Facu lt y-w ide st udent sit-in to protest t uit ion costs, but pr ior it ies peo ple, pr ior it ies.

Facu lt y ad m inist ration f ina l ly g ives in to accom modations dema nds a nd provides f ree food I n an attempt to w in t he hear ts and m inds of t he st udents, t he Facu lt y w i l l prov ide cof fee and snack s in t he Jack man At r ium. T he hope is t hat st udents w i l l be too d ist racted by t he free croissants to rea l ize t he ad m in ist rat ion has st i l l refused to add ress major issues w it h its accommodat ions pol icy.

Tu r ns out crowd f unding sites do not have the ~best~ cybersecu r it y T he recent hack of a cer ta in crowd fund ing site for a cer ta in t r uck convoy lea ked some ~interest ing~ a l leged donors from our esteemed school. T here has been no comment on t he news from t he Facu lt y, but as a fut ure note to sel f, do not use one’s fu l l name and school ema i l when suppor t ing insur rect ion ists.

t he f loss pick s are better t han not h ing.

T he t r ick iest par t about f lossing is gett ing it into your rout ine. Simply add it into your n ightt ime rout ine in bet ween your da i ly re-read of your acceptance letter and your n ight ly af f ir mat ion of t he fundamenta ls of just ice.

In Closing Ora l hyg iene has benef its t hat go beyond just your mout h. T here are proven system ic hea lt h benef its to ta k ing care of your teet h. W h i le it is easy to get caught up w it h ever y t h ing going on in our l ives, ma inta in ing your ora l hea lt h w i l l benef it you not on ly t he next t ime you get cold ca l led, but t hroughout t he rest of your l ife.

Editor’s Note: Paul Mohan i s a reg i stered denti st with the Royal College of D ental S urgeons of O ntar io.

Ultra Vires Presents: Spring is in the Air Some songs to get you in the mood for spring UV PLAYLIST COMMITTEE: HARRY MYLES (2L), ERICA BERRY (2L), MISHAIL ADEEL (2L), AND EMILY RAND (1L) Ok, spring might not actually be in the air given how it’s still freezing and the chance of snow is a very real possibility. However, the only other playlist theme idea for March was St Patrick’s Day ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. So, feel ~renewed~ with these songs by Claud, Whitney, Jay Som, SZA, and many more!

DIVERSIONS

24 | February 28, 2022

The Ultra Vires Crossword HARRY MYLES (2L) AND SHAE ROTHERY (2L)

DOW N 1. L aw school cl in ic at t he cent re of a h ir ing cont roversy, acrony m 2. You need one to enter t he law school 3. T he g reatest newspaper at t he Facu lt y of L aw 4. T he Cit y of _ _ _ _, in t he Prov ince of F lavel le 6. St udents t hat are not in law school, acro ny m 7. A newspaper _ _ _ _, or t he year after 3L 10. W here schools of f ish st udy, or t he quietest space in t he l ibrar y 13. A sister for merly k now n for her cof fee 14. Societ y t hat gover ns law yers in Ontar io, acrony m 15. A ha ir y for mer dean k now n for h is snack s 16. W hat a L at in spea ker m ight say in passing 19. L aw school cl in ic where a racoon recent ly d ied ( R I P), acrony m 22. A teach ing met hod favoured by many pro fessors

ACROSS 5. L aw school cl in ic k now n for const it ut iona l advo cacy, infor ma l ly 8. A professor who moon l ights as a Jeopardy champion 9. A popu lar upper-year course, slang i ly 11. T hr i l ler novel ist Beverly 12. A Nobel-Pr ize w inn ing a lgor it hm 17. A sister watch ing over us 18. H H, H, P, L P, or t he sy mbol of just ice

23. A n af f i xed 1L course

20. A busted Supreme Cour t Just ice

24. Da i ly r it ua l at U of T in 2022

21. T he best sect ion of U lt ra Vires

25. $33,04 0

22. Nine people d ress l i ke Santa Claus here

26. E l le Woods scored a 179

27. Room where moot points are made

Answers will be updated online at ultravires.ca

Explore | Engage | Learn Developing Future Leaders in Law

ultravires.ca