SOSC 1350 - Week 3 - Intro

Summary

In this legal studies class, the focus is on critical perspectives, particularly how race and gender influence legal interpretations. The lecture delves into the RDS case, which reached the Supreme Court of Canada, questioning judicial impartiality and bias due to comments during the 1994 trial. Students will learn the case's background, trial proceedings, Supreme Court rulings, and the aftermath. The goal is to identify key information, understand impartiality concerns, differentiate judicial decisions, and evaluate perspectives on bias.

Takeaways

• 📚 This is the third week of class, focusing on critical perspectives on the law, particularly how gender and race influence legal interpretations.
• 👨‍⚖️ The RDS case is a pivotal Supreme Court of Canada case that examined bias and impartiality in the judiciary.
• 🗓️ The RDS case originated from a 1994 trial where comments made raised questions about judicial impartiality.
• 🏛️ The case escalated to the Supreme Court, highlighting concerns about the judiciary's independence and impartiality.
• 📈 The lecture aims to guide students through the RDS case's background, trial, appeals, and aftermath.
• 🎯 Students are expected to identify essential information about the RDS case after the lesson.
• 🤔 The lecture will explore why the RDS trial raised questions of impartiality and bias, focusing on the trial and appeals process.
• 🏙️ Students will learn to differentiate between various judicial decisions and reasonings in the RDS case.
• 📊 The Supreme Court's ruling on the RDS case will be analyzed, including the differing opinions of judges.
• 🔍 The lesson will evaluate how different perspectives are labeled as impartial or biased, encouraging skepticism and consideration of diverse viewpoints.

Q & A

What is the main focus of the class in week three?

The main focus of the class in week three is to continue exploring critical perspectives on the law, specifically looking at how race factors into the ways the law can be seen, building upon the previous lesson's focus on gender.

What case is being discussed in the class?

The case being discussed is the RDS case, which went to the Supreme Court of Canada and involved questions of bias and impartiality due to comments made during the original trial in 1994.

Why did the RDS case escalate to the Supreme Court of Canada?

The RDS case escalated to the Supreme Court of Canada because it raised significant questions about judicial impartiality and the definition of bias, which are fundamental to the judiciary's independence.

What are the learning goals for the students after this lesson?

The learning goals include identifying essential information about the RDS case, explaining why the trial raised questions of impartiality and bias, differentiating between judicial decisions on the case, and evaluating reasons why different perspectives are labeled as impartial or biased.

What specific aspects of the RDS case will be covered in part one of the lesson?

Part one of the lesson will cover the background information of the RDS case, setting the stage for understanding the issues of bias and impartiality that arose during the trial.

How does the instructor plan to address the issue of judicial impartiality in the RDS case?

The instructor plans to address judicial impartiality by discussing the events at the trial, the appeals process, and the different levels of court grappling with questions of bias and impartiality.

What does the instructor hope students will understand about the Supreme Court's ruling in the RDS case?

The instructor hopes students will understand the different judicial decisions and reasoning behind the Supreme Court's ruling on the RDS case, including the varying opinions on endorsing or not endorsing the original ruling.

Why is it important to differentiate between different judicial decisions in the RDS case?

Differentiating between judicial decisions is important to understand the diverse legal reasoning and perspectives that can influence the interpretation of impartiality and bias in legal judgments.

How does the instructor aim to make students skeptical about assumptions of bias and impartiality?

The instructor aims to make students skeptical by examining how different perspectives are treated differently in terms of being labeled as impartial or biased, encouraging critical evaluation of these assumptions.

What is the broader goal for students regarding the understanding of perspectives on bias and impartiality?

The broader goal is for students to appreciate the importance of diverse perspectives in legal judgments and to question the assumptions made about which perspectives are considered more impartial or biased.

How will the instructor conclude the lesson?

The instructor will conclude the lesson by revisiting the learning goals and summarizing the key points discussed regarding the RDS case, judicial impartiality, and the treatment of different perspectives in legal decisions.