Vol 44 No 3

QUID NOVI

Vol 44 No 3 4 Oct 2022

NCDH 305 - 3644 Peel Montréal, Québec H2A 1X1

quid.law@mcgill.ca @quidnovi.mcgill

McGill University Faculty of Law Faculté de droit de l’Université McGill

44 03

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF RÉDACTRICE EN CHEF Anna McAllister ART DIRECTOR DIRECTRICE ARTISTIQUE Hanna Rioseco LAYOUT EDITOR ÉDITEUR DE MISE EN PAGE Camille Duhaime COPY EDITORS SECRÉTAIRES DE RÉDACTION Kim Baronet Giuseppe Sutera Sardo COLUMNISTS CHRONIQUEURES ET CHRONIQUEUSES Ella Johnson Gary Preteau CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS ISSUE COLLABORATEURS ET COLLABORATRICES Sarah Alarcon Carillo Félix Desrochers Misty Meanor Pablo Mhanna-Sandoval Sofia Watt Sjöström Special thanks to Prairie Koo for designing the layout. ~ The Quid Novi is published weekly by the students of the Faculty of Law at McGill University. Production is made possible through the direct support of students.

All contents copyright © 2022 Quid Novi.

Les opinions exprimées sont propres aux auteurs et ne réflètent pas nécessairement celles de l’équipe du Quid Novi. The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views of the McGill Law Students’ Association or of McGill University.

Envoyez vos commentaires ou articles avant jeudi 17h00 à quid.law@mcgill.ca.

Toute contribution doit indiquer le nom de l’auteur, son année d’étude ainsi qu’un titre et un sous -titre pour l’article. Les images doivent être soumises séparément. L’article ne sera publié qu’à la discrétion du comité de rédaction, qui basera sa décision sur la politique de rédaction disponible sur notre Facebook @quidnovi.mcgill.

1

1

QUID NOVI

CETTE SEMAINE...

44 03

Vol 44 No 3 4 Oct 2022

INSIGHTS

COMMUNAUTÉ

EVENTS

2 | FROM THE GELBER

2 | LETTER FROM THE

5 | INTRODUCTION À LA

6 | MY TIME AT MCGILL LAW A Poem

7 | CHRISTIE BIKE RIDE A lesson in enjoying law school

6 | POURQUOI LA CAQ L’A

9 | BLAST FROM THE PAST

Back to the basics: Introductory research resources

REMPORTÉ... ENCORE UN FOIS?

8 | THE CURIOUS CASE OF

THE SCARY MOVIE Looking at the recent rise of the horror genre

EDITOR Reconnect with joy

THÉORIE CRITIQUE DE LA RACE ET L’ART 27 octobre 2022

12 | AIDE FINANCIÈRE

Cours intensif sur le fédéralisme et la gouvernance

10 | WHAT ARE THE

“FACTS”?

Note to self when reading cases

11 | MISTY FOR YOU: TREAT

EVERY INTRODUCTION LIKE IT’S YOUR LAST Law school advice you can count on

14 | EXILE AND MOB RULE

CANNOT SOLVE THE SOCIAL ILLS THAT OFTEN UNDERRULE ABUSE IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE Cancel culture reviewed over a decade

1

Vol 44 ● No 3

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR Anna McAllister | 2L

Hello Quid readers, I hope that you all have the chance over the Thanksgiving and Focus Week breaks to reconnect with what brings you joy. Law school is admittedly a rigorous environment, a point comedically highlighted in the Blast From the Past for this week. As such, taking time for yourself often feels like a wasteful indulgence.

I certainly felt this way while having a category 3 mental breakdown last year in advance of my contracts midterm. At that moment, my dearest friend Emmett invited me to look at the Polaroid wall in my apartment. It was full of incredible memories from my first semester of 1L. Emmett asked frankly which of those memories I would be willing to erase from the wall in exchange for the chance of doing marginally better on my exams. This point stopped me in my tracks and made me reassess. As you inevitably become filled with dread this semester after a

night spent out with friends that likely should have been spent in the library, I invite you to consider your best times in law school, and whether you would trade them for the chance of doing better.

In all my (limited) wisdom as a 2L, I can assure you that taking time for what makes you happy is not only essential for success, but for enjoying your life.This concept is beautifully articulated in this week’s article on the Christie Bike Ride, and I hope it leaves you with the motivation it gave me to make time for some fun this fall break season.

In the spirit of breaks, the Quid will be back on November 1st to give our hardworking team a moment to reconnect with things other than the Quid that bring them joy.

We will see you then!

Anna McAllister

FROM THE GELBER Back to the basics: Introductory research resources

QUID NOVI • 4 OCT 2022

Sarah Alarcon Carillo | Reference Assistant

Are you 3 weeks into class, keep hearing terms like “consideration” and “unwritten principles” and have no idea what they mean? Or are you writing a term paper this semester and have no idea where to start?

Below are some helpful resources to get acquainted with a topic, get the ball rolling on your term paper, or simply understand what is going on in class.

1. Halsbury’s law and JurisClasseur Legal encyclopedias provide an overview of the law in a specific field and in turn provide key resources to do further reading. Halsbury’s Laws of Canada is the encyclopedia for Canada while JurisClasseur is specialized for Quebec.

HOW TO ACCESS: 1. McGill Library home page > Law subject guide > Lexis Advance Quicklaw (under Key Resources) > Halsbury’s 2

Laws of Canada or JurisClasseur Québec (under Popular Sources) OR 2. McGill Library home page > Law subject guide > Reference > Encyclopedias > Halsbury’s Laws of Canada or JurisClasseur Québec.

(Note: there is also a JurisClasseur for France and Corpus Juris Secundum is a US legal encyclopedia, among others.

All the legal encyclopedias available to McGill Law students can be found in McGill Library home page > Law subject guide > Reference > Encyclopedias.

Below is a list of legal encyclopedias available.

Suggested for first year mandatory courses Constitutional Law/ Droit constitutionnel (PUB2 101D1/ D2): Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Constitutional Law (Charter of Rights) (2019 Reissue) (Newman), Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Aboriginal -- ETTOC, IV. Aboriginal and Treaty Rights JCQ Droit public - Droit cons-titutionnel

Contractual Obligations/Obligations contractuelles (LAWG 100D1/D2 ): Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Contracts (2021 Reissue) (Swan, Adamski), JCQ Droit civil - Contrats nommés I| , JCQ Droit civil - Contrats nommés II, JCQ Droit civil - Obligations Criminal Justice/Justice pénale (LAWG 102D1/D2): Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Criminal Offences and Defences (2020 Reissue) (Gold), Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Criminal Procedure (2020 Reissue) (Gold)| JCQ Droit pénal - Droit pénal général

Complementary Social Diversity, Human Rights and Indigenous Law Courses • • • • •

Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Discrimination and Human Rights (2022 Reissue) (Ray-Ellis) Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Immigration and Citizenship (2019 Reissue) (Waldman) Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Labour (2020 Reissue) (Knight, MacDonald) Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Public International Law (2019 Reissue) (Harrington) Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Technology and Internet (2020 Reissue) (Handa)

Ex-Contractual Obligations/Obligations extra-contractuelles (LAWG 101D1/D2): Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Torts (2020 Reissue) (Feldthusen,Bélanger-Hardy) JCQ Droit civil - Responsabilité civile et professionelle

Complementary Social Diversity, Human Rights and Indigenous Law Courses

Suggested for second year mandatory courses

•

Judicial Institutions & Civil Procedure/Droit judiciaire (PROC 124): Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Civil Procedure (2021 Reissue) (Abrams, McGuinness, MacIvor, Brecher), JCQ Droit civil - Procédure civile I (2e édition), JCQ Droit civil - Procédure civile II (2e édition)

•

Property/Les biens (LAWG 220D1/D2): Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Real Property (2021 Reissue) (Lem, Bocska), JCQ Droit civil - Biens et publicité des droits

•

Complementary Civil Law Immersion Courses

•

Administration du bien d’autrui et fiducie (PRV4 548): JCQ Droit civil - Biens et publicité des droits, FASCICULE 20 Fiducie, FASCICULE 22 Administration du bien d’autrui

•

Advanced Civil Law Obligations (PROC 200): JCQ Droit civil - Contrats nommés I| , JCQ Droit civil - Contrats nommés II, JCQ Droit civil - Obligations

•

Law of Persons (PRV2 270): JCQ Droit civil - Personnes et famille Complementary Common Law Immersion Courses Advanced Common Law Obligations (PRV3 200): Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Contracts (2021 Reissue) (Swan, Adamski) Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Torts (2020 Reissue) (Feldthusen,Bélanger-Hardy) Equity & Trust (PRV4 549): Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Equitable Remedies (2020 Reissue) (Coombs), Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Trusts (2020 Reissue) (Hoffstein) Remedies (PRV3 534): Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Equitable Remedies (2020 Reissue) (Coombs)

• •

•

•

Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Discrimination and Human Rights (2022 Reissue) (Ray-Ellis) Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Employment (2019 Reissue) (Ray-Ellis) Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Environment (2022 Reissue) (Bereti, Radoja) Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Bankruptcy and Insolvency (2021 Reissue) (Bourassa) Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Business Corporations (2022 Reissue) (Wahl, Coombs) Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Administrative Law (2022 Reissue) (Régimbald, Estabrooks, Wilson).

Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Medicine and Health (2021 Reissue) (Moldofsky) Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Access to Information and Privacy (2020 Reissue) (Power) Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Securities (2022 Reissue) (MacLellan) Halsbury’s Laws of Canada - Taxation (General) (2020 Reissue) (Piurko)

2. Elgar Advanced introductions As the name suggest, Elgar Advanced introductions provides an advanced presentation of a particular topic. These are great resources are they address the difference across eh common and civil law traditions.

HOW TO ACCESS: 1.McGill Library home page > Law subject guide > E-books collections > Elgar Advanced Introductions OR 2.In the general library catalogue, select “Advanced search” > Search index: Publisher = “Elgar” AND Search index: Title = One of the names from the list below. *New since last column • •

Advanced Introduction to Law and Psychology* Advanced Introduction to Comparative Legal Methods* 3

Vol 44 ● No 3 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

QUID NOVI • 4 OCT 2022

• • • • • • • • •

4

Advanced Introduction to Landmark Criminal Cases* Advanced Introduction to U.S. Environmental Law* Advanced Introduction to Environmental Compliance and Enforcement* Advanced Introduction to Maritime Law* Advanced Introduction to Law and Renewable Energy* Advanced Introduction to Law and Development* Advanced Introduction to Legal Reasoning* Advanced Introduction to Law and Entrepreneurship* Advanced Introduction to Empirical Legal Research* Advanced Introduction to Global Administrative Law* Advanced Introduction to Global Sports Law* Advanced Introduction to Law and Literature* Advanced Introduction to Mental Health Law* Advanced Introduction to Law and Artificial Intelligence* Advanced Introduction to Legal Research Methods* Advanced Introduction to Privacy Law* Advanced Introduction Comparative Constitutional Law Advanced Introduction European Union Law Freedom of Expression Advanced Introduction Human Dignity and Law Advanced Introduction International Conflict and Security Law Advanced Introduction International Environmental Law Advanced Introduction International Human Rights Law Advanced Introduction International Humanitarian Law International Intellectual Property Advanced Introduction International Investment Law Advanced Introduction International Sales Law Advanced Introduction International Tax Law Advanced Introduction International Trade Law

• • • • • • •

Law and Development Advanced Introduction Law and Globalisation Advanced Introduction Law of International Organizations Private International Law and Procedure Advanced Introduction Private Law Advanced Introduction Space Law Advanced Introduction U.S. Criminal Procedure

3. TOPO This resource by the CAIJ provides the key resources to review for a specific research question. It is organized alphabetically for general fields of law (ex.

Droit international privé) and provides you with potential research questions (ex. Quelles sont les sources utiles à consulter sur la faillite et l’insolvabilité en droit international privé? Quelles sont les sources utiles à consulter sur les recours et la procédure en droit international privé? ) HOW TO ACCESS: McGill Library home page > Law subject guide > CAIJ > Questions de recherche TOPO (on the main page).

The list of topics can be found below.

The number in the bracket represents the number of research questions available for that topic.

A • • • • • B • • C • • • • • D •

Accès à l’information (24) Administratif (107) Aérien (8) Assurance (191) Autochtones (21) Banques et institutions financières (37) Biens et propriété (328) Commercial (147) Communications (12) Constitutionnel (42) Construction (80) Contrats nommés (110) Droit international privé (93)

• • E • • F • • • I • • • L • • M • • • • O • P • • • • • • • • • • • R • • S • • • • • • T •

Droit international public (52) Droits et libertés (135) Éducation (31) Environnement (25) Faillite et insolvabilité (72) Famille (417) Fiscal (42) Immigration et citoyenneté (45) Industrie et commerce (46) Interprétation des lois (32) Libéralités et successions (170) Louage (127) Maritime (23) Méthodes alternatives de résolution de conflits (34) Militaire (10) Municipal (148) Obligations (274) Pénal (231) Personnes (140) Prescription (95) Preuve civile (161) Preuve pénale (64) Procédure civile (418) Procédure pénale (213) Professions juridiques (152) Professions non juridiques (88) Propriété intellectuelle (104) Protection du consommateur (82) Recherche et rédaction juridiques (7) Responsabilité civile (136) Santé (70) Science, arts et recherche (10) Social (72) Sociétés et associations (24) Sociétés par actions et corporations (76) Sûretés (104) Technologies de l’information et des communications (27) Transport terrestre (44) Travail et emploi (471) Tribunaux fédéraux (6)

• • • V • Valeurs mobilières (30) • Vente (143)

5

Vol 44 ● No 3

MY TIME AT MCGILL LAW A Poem

Anonymous Submission| Law Student

Distractions, oh how I despise you Readings and cases oh how I revise you, Essential facts, oh how I summarize you Defendants, oh how I criminalize you Law School, oh how I satirise you But the truth is, McGill is all about will and, Desire to understand the legal world, In all its forms and unfurled beauty Civil and common transsystems Indigenous law, and Canadian treaty, I may just be a 1L, And I know I will study like hell, And I might as well, Because there ain’t nothing like a McGill JD/BCL I love a good ratio decidendi, And a workshop by Dean Leckey, And while some of these classes are real pickles, None are quite like Constitutional with Nichols I may or may not have done the LSAT, But I still do the cases for Farahat, And my schedule has a bunch of readings time blocks, That I use to scour through all the relevant pubdocs

QUID NOVI • 4 OCT 2022

And while I left out a lot On the start of my law school career, I hope you have so far got A taste of my McGill Law time here

Un peu d’histoire Pour comprendre la popularité de la Coalition Avenir Québec aujourd’hui, il faut jeter un œil attentif à l’histoire de l’État québécois. Je n’irai pas trop loin, je vous le promets. Depuis la création du Canada en 1867, on peut distinguer au Québec différentes ères politiques ayant toutefois cela en commun qu’elles sont marquées par l’alternance de deux partis dominants. De 1867 à 1936, c’est le Parti conservateur du Québec et le Parti libéral du Québec qui s’échangent le pouvoir, à peu près de manière égale, bien que certaines périodes aient vu les conservateurs ou les libéraux se maintenir mandat après mandat pendant plusieurs années. En 1936, l’Union nationale, grand parti de droite économique et religieuse, brise le cycle et va, à son tour, jouer à saute-mouton avec le Parti libéral. René Lévesque, en 1976, met fin à ce cirque en menant le Parti québécois à la victoire, redéfinissant entièrement le paradigme politique, où s’entrechoquaient jusque-là le conservatisme social et le progressisme social de l’époque.

Dans les décennies qui ont suivi, quand on parlait de politique autour d’une table au Québec, dans les bars, dans les cafés, ou dans les cercles d’intellectuels, on se définissait soit en tant que souverainiste ou en tant que fédéraliste. François Legault, lui, en remportant le scrutin de 2018, redéfinit complètement le débat et le ramène petit à petit au paradigme original, le clivage gauche-droite.

Le nationalisme comme identité politique La CAQ a tout prévu d’avance. Après le référendum de 1995, l’option indépendantiste est vivement secouée et le Parti québécois, par le fait même, se retrouve affaibli. Les chefs péquistes gagnent certaines élections, mais ne promettent plus le pays et ne jurent que par la « bonne gouvernance » en attente des « conditions favorables ». Les libéraux, eux, s’épanouissent dans le statu quo et mordent dans la mondialisation à pleines dents, accélérant notamment l’immigration.

Les souverainistes désillusionnés et les fédéralistes autonomistes ne se retrouvent plus nulle part.

POURQUOI LA CAQ L’A REMPORTÉ…

C’est exactement là que François Legault entre en jeu.

ENCORE UNE FOIS? Il présente un fédéralisme revendicateur d’une certaine

autonomie pour le Québec, une option « nationaliste ». En 2018, après l’austérité libérale, les Québécois cherchent du changement, ne sont intéressés ni par la Malgré les bévues flagrantes qui ont teinté sa campagne souveraineté ni par un fédéralisme résigné et prennent électorale, François Legault, chef de la Coalition Avenir le beau risque de la CAQ. Elle forme donc un gouverQuébec, se voit encore porté au pouvoir, prêt à gouverner nement majoritaire. notre nation pour les quatre prochaines années. Il a obtenu le « mandat fort » qu’il avait demandé aux Québé- Après son accession au pouvoir, M. Legault tente d’apacois pour rapatrier les pleins pouvoirs en immigration. iser les angoisses existentielles d’un Québec qui subit Cette victoire renouvelée peut étonner certains, mais elle les mutations de la mondialisation, avec les lois 21 et est loin d’être surprenante. M. Legault promet exact- 96, portant respectivement sur la laïcité de l’État et sur ement l’offre politique que les Québécois cherchent, la protection de la langue française. Il crée une grande pour le meilleur ou pour le pire. majorité d’heureux chez ceux qui s’identifient à son Félix Desrochers| 1L

6

idéal de nationalisme et provoque de vives envolées contestataires chez quelques éditorialistes des journaux La Presse, Le Devoir et The Montreal Gazette, sans surprise. Pendant ce temps, il se livre dans une joute rhétorique endiablée à l’Assemblée nationale avec le chef de Québec solidaire, Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois, afin d’annoncer implicitement que c’est lui, son réel adversaire.

Cette tactique a pour but de fragiliser encore davantage le Parti libéral et le Parti québécois et d’engendrer en conséquence le paradigme politique qu’il désire : le nationalisme contre le « wokisme », le centre droit de l’échiquier contre une gauche qui fait peur au Québécois moyen. Au bout du compte, cette redéfinition de la dynamique politique lui assurerait une bonne longévité au poste tant convoité. Entre-temps, la pandémie arrive et sa gestion active lui attribue énormément de popularité. C’est dans ce contexte qu’il affiche un air confiant en vue des élections d’octobre, en demandant aux Québécois « un mandat fort ».

Une campagne électorale décevante, mais suffisante Par conséquent, malgré ses performances défensives et accusatrices au Face-à-Face de TVA et au Débat des chefs 2022 de Radio-Canada, ses amalgames douteux entre violence et immigration, les propos incendiaires de son ministre Jean Boulet, son refus de révéler les études relativement à son coûteux projet de 3e lien entre la ville de Québec et Lévis, ses votes ne s’envolent pas.

Malgré le changement que tente d’incarner Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois en promettant de faire du Québec « un des pays les plus verts du monde » et l’esprit rassembleur de Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, chef du Parti québécois, qui selon une majorité de commentateurs politiques, a mené la meilleure campagne, l’étoile de François Legault continue de briller. Pourquoi? Il fait ce qu’une grande partie de Québécois, toujours ébranlés dans leur subconscient par les échecs constitutionnels de la fin du 20e siècle, demandent : il fait le strict minimum.

class unprepared. I felt slow. Three weeks in law school and I still hadn’t figured it out. How could I hope to find a studying rhythm if I couldn’t even find my footing?

“We could not have asked for better weather,” an organizer shared conspiratorially as participants milled about on that sunny Saturday. To a first-time participant like me, it soon became apparent that we were further blessed with a wonderful community. Donald Tremblay, founding president of the Mobile Legal Clinic, introduced himself to and thanked every participant. Remarks by Mr. Tremblay, organizer Garima Karia, and Justice Alexander Pless soon followed.

We were gathered for the noble cause of access to justice. At the time of writing, this year’s ride has raised over $9,300 for the Mobile Legal Clinic, an achievement attributable to generous donors, participants, and organizers alike.

Justice Pless had convinced me and several other 1Ls to sign up at the last minute following a talk in our criminal justice class earlier that week. In those talks and in his remarks on the steps of the Nahum Gelber Library on Saturday morning, he reminded us of the value of taking a break from school to enjoy the McGill Law community while we still could.

A lesson in enjoying law school

I am grateful for and intend on following this advice.

While still in my early days as a member, I am already humbled to see what a dynamic and caring community this is. I hadn’t brought my bike in from Ottawa, so I was lent a bike by an organizer and a helmet

by Justice Pless. As we biked through downtown Montreal towards the Lachine Canal, I talked with fellow 1Ls, upper-years, a professor, and a justice about topics large and small. A stop at the Pointe du Parc René-Levesque afforded a moment of rest by the blue expanse. Several kilometres later, we settled on a lip overlooking Verdun Beach and wolfed down sandwiches and pastries from Sweet Lee’s for lunch.

The capicola and cheddar had me feeling like I was on The Sopranos. A far cry from a frustrating walk up Peel with my readings still incomplete.

Even hiking up Peel Street could not dampen my optimism on the morning of Saturday, September 24, 2022.

I was en route to the law Faculty, where I would meet fellow students, staff, and community members for the annual Christie Bike Ride. The weather app read 18°C. The shining sun announced that the number would only climb from there.

After lunch, a few of us descended onto the small beach to be greeted by Lili, a very agile swimmer despite her being a corgi. She inspired me to dip my toes in the St Lawrence. Trying to ignore the cold, I reflected on the idea of enjoying one’s life while studying the law. My first month had been an exhausting one. As fun as Frosh, orientation, and classes had been, September had left me more worried than anything. Will I enjoy my time in law school?

Just two days before I had been climbing up Peel in decidedly poorer spirits. I hadn’t managed to finish my readings of the day on time and was headed to

Well, I certainly enjoyed that Saturday. I hope to live many more of these times with other members of this community in the next few years.

CHRISTIE BIKE RIDE Pablo Mhanna-Sandoval| 1L

7

Vol 44 ● No 3

THE CURIOUS CASE OF THE SCARY MOVIE Looking at the recent rise of the horror genre Gary Preteau| 3L

The first few weeks of fall evoke many different things in different people. Some modify their Starbucks order; others pepper their homes with pumpkin décor. For me, the chillier weather is a cue for more scary movies in my cinematic diet. Luckily for me, and anyone who enjoys a good fright, the renaissance of the horror genre means there is a bevy of choices unlike past years.

This renaissance has been both a critical and commercial one. Horror had its largest market share yet in 2021 and has performed above its typical average since 2017.

Even a quick review of the best performing movies of each year shows a recent uptick in high-grossing horror movies.

QUID NOVI • 4 OCT 2022

So, we now know that horror movies have been especially successful as of late, which begs the question of “why”. An easy answer is the abundance of burgeoning talent in the horror genre. Jordan Peele has established himself as the premier horror director with films like “Get Out” and “Nope”. Ari Aster has mastered the art of eeriness with “Midsommar” and “Hereditary”.

On the television side, Mike Flanagan’s “Haunting of Hill House” and “Midnight Mass” are some of the best series available on Netflix, horror or not. These creators, along with many lesser-known talents like Ti West and Robert Eggers, have been fuelling this boom with excellent and compelling horror content.

However, talent alone is not enough to revive what was once considered a dying genre. Alfred Hitchcock is quoted as saying “[t]here is no horror in the bang, only in the anticipation of it”. This quote doubles as advice to filmmakers and the business argument for producing a horror movie. While action movies need massive budgets to produce the “bang”, horror is much cheaper by focusing on the expectation and anxiety leading up to said bang. Blumhouse Productions is a perfect example of taking advantage of the lower costs of horror. Despite having few movies with a budget above $10 million, the horror-focused production company has regularly cruised passed the $100 million mark in worldwide box office returns.

To this point, we know that there is great and inexpensive content being made in the genre, but we are still missing one piece to explain the recent boom. Like everything in the world, the COVID-19 pandemic played a role. The pandemic was devastating for the film industry. Theatres were closed for the better part 8

of two years and moviegoers were apprehensive about cramming into a room with a bunch of strangers. Naturally, the box office was decimated.

While scary movies were not exempt from some suffering, their inexpensiveness made them ideal candidates to fill the theatrical void. Big budget action movies, like Top Gun and Marvel movies, need massive box office returns to make a profit on their budget. Additionally, studios are reluctant to release movies that, in normal times, could earn a billion dollars at the box office when people are not going to the theatre.

Horror, with its comparatively tiny budget, is an easier financial case to make. You need far fewer comfortable moviegoers to make money on your $5 million thriller in an abandoned cabin than your $150 million epic with superpowers and explosions. So, while the blockbusters got delayed, horror movies simply got released and seized the opportunity to grow.

This leaves horror in an interesting place in 2022. The height of pandemic-related restrictions and anxieties have subsided. The box office has seen the return of mega-blockbusters and, consequently, horror’s market share has dropped in 2022, albeit it is still above most pre-pandemic years. There is some reason to think that horror may be back on the downward trend from its peak.

However, there are still many conditions that can sustain the genre. One of the film industry’s major pandemic adjustments was a heavy shift towards streaming services. Most notably, Warner Brothers shifted their entire 2021 theatrical slate to HBO Max. While this drastic move is unlikely to happen again, the convenience of streaming from home rather than going to the theatre is something audiences likely enjoyed. In trying to fill out streaming services with a breadth of options, the inexpensiveness of horror seems a massive benefit for the genre’s continued growth. Additionally, given streaming does not offer the massive allure of huge box office returns, it is entirely possible that more expensive genres, like action and adventure, are increasingly replaced by their cheaper horror counterparts.

The next few years will answer this lingering question as the cinematic landscape settles into its new shape.

Whether the commercial success continues or stalls out, us horror fans have been blessed with an era of quality filmmaking to perfectly match this autumn weather.

BLAST FROM THE PAST We have made it to the week before Thanksgiving (an especially impressive feat for 1Ls who don’t have focus week to look forward to). Here’s to hoping your first weeks went better than they did for Juris in this October 1984 satirical letter home to Mom.

9

Vol 44 ● No 3

WHAT ARE THE “FACTS”?

Note to Self When Reading Cases Sofia Watt Sjöström| 2L

Note to self: When reading cases, remember there’s probably more going on in there that you don’t see. Don’t take the facts for granted.

QUID NOVI • 4 OCT 2022

This is something I was reminded of at a few different points during 1L, but it hit me hard this summer. I was attending a seminar on litigation1. Because of this focus, class discussion felt quite different from what I was used to. Rather than approach cases academically, asking “What is the Law/Rule/Ratio?”, we asked “How could this argument be strengthened? What’s a counterargument? How might you see this from the other side?”

party, they were clearly in the wrong.

Then, however, I moved on to the appellant’s factum—and found a different story! From this perspective, I definitely sided with the losers… How could I possibly have felt so differently only minutes ago? I was horrified.

In class, at least at McGill Law, we usually only get as far as the judgement. We see justice being served. We extract an Issue, Ratio, Analysis, and Conclusion in preparation for the exam. But what about the rest of it—what don’t we see?

In Criminal Justice last year, I felt these omissions acutely when we read the leading case on causation in manslaughter. In R v Smithers3 , hockey players throw racial insults at the only black player of the other team, Smithers. They fight afterwards. Smithers kicks an opponent in the gut, killing him. It’s clearly manslaughter.

For me, this vantage point was new and valuable. It forced me not to take anything for granted. It made me realize not only how slippery law can be, but also that dealing with this slipperiness is a big part of what lawyers do. In class, I often had the impression that judgements were obvious or inevitable. This seminar reminded me that nothing is decided in advance. The law may be straightforward, but its application rarely is. Every case has unique facts. Every case has the potential to be judged in different ways.

And yet, the judgement omits many, many facts4. For example, there’s the all-white jury and the fact that this would’ve been a tragic accident had it simply happened minutes earlier on the ice, subject to the rules and penalties of hockey5. To me, the most telling fact was that when Smithers lashed out at the boy he killed, Smithers was pinned down to the ground6.

He was also underage. In other words, this was clearly a child lashing out in self-defence. It seems absurd to me that he was convicted for manslaughter.

Perhaps this sounds obvious. It’s pretty intuitive that law is a social construct since rules and principles were made to serve human ends. What may be less intuitive is the notion that facts, too, are constructed2. The facts of the case are often easy to grasp and seem to denote an objective reality. Yet, they too are just one way of telling the story. Another judge, perhaps one writing in a different context or legal system, might have written the facts differently. Especially if they chose a different result. It’s like telling a story in retrospect—you see things differently when you know how they end. Some things are obscured, whereas others stand out more starkly. Looking back, it’s easy not to notice this and thus, be oblivious to other possible versions of the tale. In the same way, surely knowing the case’s outcome shapes judges’ framing of the facts.

I still remember this judgement because it stood out to me as blatantly racist and unjust. Therefore, no matter how crucial of a legal test Smithers may provide, it shocks me that we still read it for its legal dimensions. The law is grounded in concrete facts, and this tenet of criminal justice is based on a real injustice.

In the seminar, we had to read the same case in three ways, based on three documents: a court judgement and two factums. When I read the judgement, I was quickly persuaded by the court. Although I felt bad for the losing 1 With the Pacific Centre for Environmental Law and Litigation. I highly recommend their Zoom seminars, so please reach out if you want to know more.

2 We studied this in Foundations last year, which was interesting– but it hit differently in practice. See generally René Provost, “Fact” (2020) 66:1 McGill LJ 67.

10

Do law students across Canada get the same background that was provided by our professor? Or do they simply read the judgement, extract the legal test, and move on? I’m afraid that risks missing a lot.

How often does this happen in other classes without us even being aware of it? How often do legal judgements gloss over unjust or ambiguous facts? How often do we miss the true story?

I guess it depends on what you mean by truth. If you want the whole truth, then the answer is probably: in every single case.

3 [1978] 1 SCR 506, 75 DLR (3d) 321.

4 Thankfully, we read more than just the judgement in class.

5 See Ross Thomas Runfola, “He Is a Hockey Player, 17, Black and Convicted of Manslaughter”, New York Times (27 October 1974) 226, online: <www.nytimes.com/1974/10/27/archives/he-is-a-hockey-player-17-black-and-convicted-of-manslaughter.html>.

6 Ibid.

Even the most thorough judgement will omit information.

Some judges tell you which side they’ve chosen before they even get to the facts. Ultimately, though, regardless of personal style, all judges focus on the facts most relevant, or amenable, to the chosen outcome. In Smithers, this resulted in serious omissions.

Maybe the whole truth isn’t necessary for our purposes all the time. Law school is all about skimming (or “reading effectively”), after all. Just remember there’s probably more going on here that you don’t see. Don’t take the facts for granted. It’s probably good to step back and think about this from time to time.

MISTY FOR YOU: TREAT EVERY INTRODUCTION LIKE IT’S YOUR LAST Law School Advice You Can Count On Misty Meanor | Not a lawyer

I graduated from one of Canada’s top law schools with really good grades. Now, I’m using my knowledge to help struggling law students make it in this competitive world.

Today, we’re covering introductions.

Hi everyone, I’m Misty. I’m 22, I’m from Montreal, and I’m interested in international human rights law. My undergraduate degree is in political science, and my dad, Quebec’s best criminal defence attorney, inspired me to study law.

If you think that introduction was even mildly good, well, honey, you have a lot of work ahead of you. It’s probably the worst way you could ever introduce yourself to the people you will be working with (or against) for the next 40 years.

You know why? Because it’s not LUSH. Every introduction must account for four things: L – language U – unique S – short H – humble Let me explain.

Language: Know your introduction by heart in both French and English. Don’t use fancy words or complicated phrasing.

Practice it before every first meeting or class. Memorise, memorise, memorise. You’re a Pacific bluefin tuna entering a world

of sharks. Keep your intro simple dans les deux langues officielles. If you stumble, the sharks will eat you. Don’t give them the opportunity, tuna!

Unique: Unless general information is asked of you, don’t even bother sharing it. You have a political science degree? Great, so do 70% of your classmates. You’re 22? Everyone has age bias, don’t risk introducing it. (Especially you, CÉGEPs. You’re always guilty of this.) You’re interested Short: Do you get bored listening to your classmates’ introductions? Well, they’re bored of listening to yours. Introductions to peers should never take longer than 20 seconds. And if you’re speaking to someone you would vouvoyer, it shouldn’t be longer than 10 seconds. They don’t have time to hear that you volunteered for your MP, and they probably don’t care.

In one-on-one introductions, use extra time to ask questions.

Law types love talking about themselves, so take advantage of this to make a good impression.

Humble: In law school, there is such a thing as being too humble.

But that’s not an excuse to flex. There’re no hard and fast rule to this, but you’ll want to keep certain things in mind. What sort of facts are other people sharing? If the first three people shared stories about their pets or weekend, don’t mention you’re a Rhodes Scholar. What does your audience want to hear about you? Definitely not that you’re an IB Program graduate. Keep it more recent.

Remember, the facts you share will mark you for the rest of your law school career. If you say you chose law because your dad is Quebec’s top criminal defence lawyer, they’ll be wondering why you make the worst contributions in class. Don’t share something your classmates will hold you to or that can be used for comparison. And if you can’t hold an intelligent conversation on the facts you want to share, just keep them to yourself.

Using the LUSH method, here’s how I would rephrase my introduction: Salut à tous, how’s it going? I’m Misty. I worked in maritime law for three years, specifically piracy litigation, but I’m exploring new career paths. In my spare time I volunteer at a cat shelter and teach ESL to orphaned refugee children. I’m looking forward to meeting everyone.

See? When your introduction is LUSH, it’s easy to make a great first impression.

For practice, attend Coffeehouse. Seek out the Dean, professors, recruiters, judges, and burnt out 4Ls. Once you can hold their attention, you’re ready for anyone.

Cheers, Misty xx 11

Vol 44 ● No 3

COURS INTENSIF SUR LE FÉDÉRALISME ET LA GOUVERNANCE Aide financière La Chaire Peter MacKell offre un soutien financier à un·e. étudiant·e de la Faculté de droit de McGill souhaitant participer à l’École d’hiver d’EURAC sur le fédéralisme, qui se déroulera du 6 février au 17 février 2023 à Innsbruck (Autriche) et Bolzano (Italie).

L’École d’hiver est destinée aux participant·e·s de toutes nationalités qui désirent enrichir leur connaissance du fédéralisme et de la gouvernance multiniveau par une approche interdisciplinaire et comparative. Pour plus de détails, voir https://winterschool.eurac.edu.

L’allocation visant à couvrir les frais d’inscription, de voyage et d’hébergement serait d’une valeur maximale de 2 000 $ CA. Procédure : Les étudiant·e·s intéressé·e·s doivent postuler selon les règles du programme auprès de l’EURAC directement (information ici). La date limite pour postuler auprès de l’EURAC est le dimanche 16 octobre 2022, 17h59, heure de Montréal.

Pour fins d’information, merci d’aviser la Pre Johanne Poirier du dépôt de votre candidature à l’adresse suivante : johanne.poirier3@mcgill.ca, en mettant « MACKELL Stipend / Allocation » en objet.

Une fois accepté·e par le programme, l’étudiant·e pourra postuler pour l’allocation, en transmettant une lettre de motivation, un CV, un relevé de notes de la Faculté de droit de McGill, de même que la lettre d’acceptation au programme, à la prof. Poirier à la même adresse courriel.

Admissibilité :

QUID NOVI • 4 OCT 2022

La bourse est offerte aux étudiant·e·s des 1er, 2e ou 3e cycles de la Faculté de droit de l’Université McGill. Les étudiant·e·s ayant terminé leurs études à la Faculté en mai 2022 pourront également postuler.

Si plusieurs étudiant·e·s de la Faculté sont accepté·e·s par le programme, un processus de sélection pourrait être organisé à McGill afin d’attribuer l’allocation.

Pour plus d’information, merci (johanne.poirier3@mcgill.ca).

12

de

*** communiquer

avec

la

Pre

Johanne

Poirier

13

Vol 44 ● No 3

EXILE AND MOB RULE CANNOT SOLVE THE SOCIAL ILLS THAT OFTEN UNDERLIE ABUSE IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE Cancel culture reviewed over a decade Ella Johnson| 2L

When I was 22 and living far from home for the first time, my mother’s ex-boyfriend was “cancelled” by way of an Instagram post that deemed him a “#dangerouscommunitymember”. It was the fall of 2019 and “cancel culture” was in full swing. The post listed accusations of his maltreatments – sexual harassment, manipulation - of the young women who had worked for his small business over decades. It called for his business to not be patronized and for people to not apply to work there. The goal of the post was to protect people from experiencing the same abuse that the poster alleged others had experienced in the past.

QUID NOVI • 4 OCT 2022

For the next few days, I tracked the story as it developed through furtive phone calls and texts at work.

Within a day, a local paper that covered the food, arts and entertainment industries in my home city had picked up the story. Within two, someone had thrown a brick through the window of his business during the night. Within three, my mom heard through the rumor mill that he was closing the business permanently and leaving town. After a week had gone by with no sign the business would reopen, it seemed the rumors were true.

At my job, processing samples alone in a windowless lab, I grappled with the old emotions dredged up by the drama. My own history with cultures of abuse and cancellation goes back further than my mom’s ex’s cancellation, back to when I was 15 in 2012. I remember when I felt the kind of fear and powerlessness that led me to think that manipulative, abusive, “#dangerouscommunitymembers” needed to be canceled, exiled from my community. I was plunged back into that place in the fall of 2019. But I do not feel so powerless now, and from this stronger place, I have some real concerns about the effectiveness of the politics I practiced as a teenager as a strategy for stopping abuse. It has been clear to me, in my own experiences with abuse, that it is a cultural problem and one that will require a cultural shift to be addressed. But I do not believe that cancel culture is the way to do that. To explain why, I will have to go back through my own history with these issues.

When I was in high school, my debate coach treated my teammates and I inappropriately from 2012 to 14

2013, emotionally manipulating us and regularly making uncomfortable sexual inuendoes. Then, one day, wanting to talk to someone and without really considering the consequences, I mentioned his behavior to the right person and set in motion a chain of events that led to his firing. In that era, the social practices around those behaviors were straightforward. My coach did something wrong, therefore he was fired. Other members of the community I knew and trusted remained friends with my former coach – he was not exiled from the community of debate.

And I felt far more guilt than vindication for getting him fired.

However, around the time I reported my coach, I became increasingly aware that competitive debate had an abuse problem that went beyond just my coach 1.

My coach had been hired at our school despite having been fired from his last position for calling one of his students a “slut”, which the administrators of our program evidently had not found concerning. Many coaches also seemed to think that students’ high intelligence equated to adulthood and to an ability to give informed consent. I realized that coaches held an enormous amount of power over students. They were our ticket into an activity that could help us get scholarships to elite schools and they provided a home for misfits, people who did not feel that they had other communities to fall back on if they lost debate. And, because debate was a competitive activity, there was a tendency to worship people who had been especially successful or who were known for being particularly smart. There was a culture of exceptionalism that created impunity for the more successful people, similar to the exceptionalism that has long protected college athletes from abuse allegations.

The problem was so bad that the debate camps we attended every summer had started to give lectures on the issue of abuse. They would separate us by gender.

1 See Emma Gray, “Competitive Debaters Are Ready For Their ‘Me Too’ Moment”, HuffPost (1 October 2020), online: <https://www. huffpost.com/entry/high-school-debate-me-too_n_5f7217fcc5b6f622a0c2ab94>.

The lecture for female students sought to provide a safe space to process abuse and to encourage students to speak up. The lecture for male students sought to catch abuse early on, to teach the boys not to emulate the behavior of coaches, and to encourage them to report abuse too. Those lectures worked, to an extent.

It was because of one of them that I reported my coach. But abuse remained prevalent because it was so deeply rooted in the culture.

Confronted with that culture of abuse as teenagers, my friends and I resorted to what I think of as a kind of guerilla justice, though we were not seeking justice so much as safety. I clearly remember finding out about a particularly alarming instance of abuse and sexual coercion of a student by two coaches in 2015.

It still makes my stomach turn to think about it. And I remember that without even really discussing it, we all made it very clear that no one who remained friends with those two coaches was to be trusted, spoken to, or befriended. We tried to exile them, to “cancel” them.

I made it through two years of college without any similar experiences, but then in 2017, the #MeToo movement took off just as I became tuned into another subculture with its own abuse problems. When #MeToo began, I felt shocked to see the politics I had practiced as a teenager used by adults. I could not believe that they too felt so powerless to protect themselves and others from serial abusers that they had to use social media and exile to do it. At first, as people like Weinstein or men within the Fox corporation went down, these true serial abusers who had so blatantly coerced, scared, and abused women for years with no consequences, I was hopeful that this would make the workplace safer by the time I entered it. But I was also watching as these politics evolved into another subculture, an alternative music scene that my housemates and I supported by running a small venue out of our basement. The trend within that subculture seemed to be a couple of years ahead of the national trend and I was concerned by what I was seeing it become.

Again, it was clear to me that abuse was a cultural problem in that music scene, which had odd similarities to competitive debate. Dominated by small emo and punk bands playing in basements and hoping to get some air play on college radio stations, it was a refuge for misfits and queer kids. People were hero-worshipped for their musicianship, performative ability, or plain coolness, giving them a status “above the law”.

For lifelong misfits, the rush of finding a community where one could not only fit in but be popular could sometimes bring out the worst. And people also had a more practical kind of power – if the person who

booked the shows at the biggest small venues in your town had beef with you, it could ruin your chances at breaking out.

And because of all these similarities, the music scene also had an abuse problem, and people in that community were also regulating it by exiling those accused. Being closely involved in that scene from 2017 to 2019, I saw an evolution of the politics I had known in debate. The levels of abuse that were deemed severe enough for a person to be exiled were becoming lower and lower, the specifics vaguer. My house once received a message telling us not to book a band because one of its members was guilty of some abuse that the sender would not specify. We ultimately decided that we could not justify banning someone with so little information to go on, but others may not have made the same call. And as the #MeToo movement progressed over the next couple of years, it was clear that the national bar for “dangerous” behavior was lowering too. By 2019, you could lose your job over a stray tweet.

Cancel culture tries to correct cultures of abuse. It tries to make the practice of abuse taboo and it seeks to emphasize that no one is above the law to correct for the exceptionalism that has protected abusers in many subcultures. But despite cancel culture’s apparent goal of ending exceptionalism, it is defined by status and exceptionalism too. It takes status, followers, to effectively cancel someone. But, more dangerously, canceling others and showing how aware you are of these social norms can also be a way to earn social power. Cancel culture thus perpetuates jockeying for status, which seemed very tied to the cultural ills in debate and music that I saw as giving rise to abusive behaviors. It also incentivizes shaming such that what you are shaming for begins to matter less and less. This sliding standard of what someone can be “cancelled” for is quite dangerous in its own right, particularly given the potential consequences of cancellation.

The case of my mother’s ex highlights how grave those consequences can be and the concern I have as a result. His cancellation cost him his livelihood and his city; he was effectively forced into exile. Those intense consequences were not brought about by any kind of principled application of justice, but rather by mob rule. There are reasons why we have stopped using exile and mob rule, as common as they have been in human history, and replaced them with principled justice systems. Our justice system is failing us in many ways when it comes to protecting us from abuse, but it does still consider the possibility that the accused might have rights worth protecting too, that

15

Vol 44 ● No 3 they may deserve the chance to defend themselves and a punishment that is proportionate to their crime, among other things. These considerations cannot be accounted for by a twitter mob.

QUID NOVI • 4 OCT 2022

All of these failures to fix the cultural ills tied to abuse are especially worrying, given that the political will to act on this issue will not last forever. This is not the first time in recent U.S. history 2 that violence against women has become a major concern: back in the 1990s, Anita Hill shone as the instigator of the “Year of the Woman” 3 and a younger Joe Biden successfully passed the Violence Against Women Act4.

That moment ended and clearly left many problems unresolved. I am worried that this moment will end in the same way. Increasingly, formerly cancelled people such as Al Franken 5 and Louis C.K 6. are making comebacks from exile, signaling that things may be shifting. It is time for the movement to begin to think about what we may want to do with the political will that we have left, given that it may be time to leave some of the tactics of the past five years behind.

2 I cannot speak for Canada.

3 See “How Anita Hill’s testimony led to the “Year of the Woman” (25 November 2019), online (podcast): The Washington Post <https://www.washingtonpost.com/podcasts/retropod/how-anitahills-testimony-led-to-the-year-of-the-woman-1/>.

4 See “About Vice President Biden’s Efforts to End Violence Against Women”, online: The White House <https://obamawhitehouse. archives.gov/1is2many/about>.

5 For his return see “Al Franken Becomes First Former U.S. Senator to Host ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live’”, The New York Times (17 August 2022), online: <https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/17/arts/television/ al-franken-jimmy-kimmel-live.html>; for his cancellation see Jane Mayer, “The Case of Al Franken”, The New Yorker (22 July 2019), online: <https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/07/29/the-caseof-al-franken>. I will note that Al Franken is generally seen to have been in a different category than Louis C.K. and it is perhaps unfair to put them in the same sentence; for context on some of the nuances and complications around the Franken case, see Michelle Goldberg, “Opinion: I was wrong about Al Franken”, The New York Times (21 July 2022), online: <https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/21/opinion/ michelle-goldberg-al-franken.html>.

6 For his return and some context on the initial fall from grace, see Chris Murphy, “Disgraced Comedian Louis C.K. Is Going on a Comeback Tour”, Vanity Fair (6 August 2021), online: <https://www. vanityfair.com/hollywood/2021/08/disgraced-comedian-louis-ck-isgoing-on-a-comeback-tour>.

16

QUID NOVI • 4 OCT 2022

Vol 44 ● No 3

18