We tell you about Wolf Ruck's successful challenge to Mississauga's anti-weeds bylaw, the dropping of a ticket issued by Kingston police who used a surveillance drone, and a proposal to criminalize "condoning, denial, justification, or minimization" of residential schools.

Stories and cases discussed in this week's episode:

• VICTORY: Ontario court strikes down bylaw that let city mow down naturalized garden (TheCCF.ca)
• CCF Intervenes to Stop Charter Being Stretched to Protect Bike Lanes
• Crown withdraws ticket issued after Kingston police use drone to spy on woman in vehicle (TheCCF.ca)
• Federal government won’t say whether it will criminalize residential school denials (The Globe and Mail)
• Toronto lawyer faces criminal contempt proceedings after admitting to misleading court about AI use (Law Times)

Not Reserving Judgment is a podcast about Canadian constitutional law hosted by Josh Dehaas, Joanna Baron, and Christine Van Geyn.

The show is brought to you by the Canadian Constitution Foundation, a non-partisan legal charity dedicated to defending rights and freedoms. To support our work, visit theccf.ca/donate.

On Episode 114, we explain why we think that banning calls to "globalize the intifada" would be counter-productive, we discuss the Liberals' new crime bill that would create special rules for "femicide," and we tell you who was naughty and who was nice for civil liberties in 2025.

Stories and cases discussed in this week's episode:

• CCF Unwraps 2025 Naughty & Nice List (TheCCF.ca)
• 'It's just too easy to harm women' — What the numbers tell us about 'femicide' in Canada (National Post)
• BIll C-16, Protecting Victims Act (Parl.ca)
• What is in Bill C-16, Ottawa’s legislation that seeks to toughen gender-based violence laws? (Globe and Mail)
• What does ‘globalise the intifada’ mean, and why does NSW want to ban the chant? (The Guardian)

Not Reserving Judgment is a podcast about Canadian constitutional law hosted by Josh Dehaas, Joanna Baron, and Christine Van Geyn.

The show is brought to you by the Canadian Constitution Foundation, a non-partisan legal charity dedicated to defending rights and freedoms. To support our work, visit theccf.ca/donate.

On Episode 113, we have an exclusive story of big pharma attacking a University of Toronto professor for his views on DEI, we tell you about judges suing to get a $28,000 raise, and we explain how a New Brunswick court decision could help protect private property nationwide.

Stories and cases discussed in this week's episode:

• Implications for BC of the NBCA Decision on Aboriginal Title and Private Property (Law for Breakfast)
• J.D. Irving, Limited et al. v. Wolastoqey Nation, 2025 NBCA 129 (CanLII)
• Leigh Revers: The dark side of the feminization of higher education (National Post)
• Requiring lawyers to swear oath to the King is unconstitutional, Alberta’s top court rules (Globe and Mail)
• Wirring v Law Society of Alberta, 2025 ABCA 413 (CanLII)
• John Ivison: Judges suing Ottawa for fatter salaries are shameless (National Post)
• Sweeping Quebec crime bill would ban gang colours, restrict protests and create sex offenders' registry (Montreal Gazette)
• Parker v. King, 2025 ONSC 6813 (CanLII)

Not Reserving Judgment is a podcast about Canadian constitutional law hosted by Josh Dehaas, Joanna Baron, and Christine Van Geyn.

The show is brought to you by the Canadian Constitution Foundation, a non-partisan legal charity dedicated to defending rights and freedoms. To support our work, visit theccf.ca/donate.

CORRECTION: In this episode, we stated that U of T rescinded the hiring of a professor because a donor disagreed with the political views of a particular visiting professor that U of T had considered hiring. In fact, the position was an administrative one, and an independent investigation concluded that the donor did not influence the university’s decision to discontinue the recruitment, and that no formal offer of employment had been made.