Canadian Lawyer

w w w . C A N A D I A N L a w y e r m a g . c o m A U G U S T 2 0 1 7 17 packaging), particularly given the court's role in keeping the executive branch in check. I've suggested that a U.S.-style system would be better, with the prime minister nominating a candidate who then requires formal confirmation by Parliament following public hearings by a parliamentary committee. Implicit in this idea is that under the present system the Supreme Court may not be as inde- pendent from the executive as it should be, ideologically speaking at least. Before Cromwell left last year, to be replaced by a Trudeau appointment (Malcolm Rowe), seven of the nine judg- es had been appointed by former prime minister Stephen Harper. This sum- moned up the frightening spectre of a "Harper Court" doing Harper's bidding and extending his influence for years after he left office. It didn't happen. The Harper Court clearly felt free to poke its patron in the eye. It's known as the Warren Effect. As U.S. president, Dwight Eisenhower appointed Earl Warren as chief justice of the U.S. in 1953. Eisenhower thought Warren was a safe and predictable Republican. He turned out to be liberal in his opinions. Eisenhower later said the appointment was the "biggest damn fool mistake I ever made." You just can't be sure how judges are going to behave once appointed. So, maybe I've been wrong. Maybe the way we appoint our Supreme Court judges is OK. But there is one other thing to be said about it. The very private nature of the appointment process distances the public. It encourages the idea that the Supreme Court is a remote institution. To most Canadians, SCC judges are extraso- lar figures. Few Canadians could name even one sitting judge. One reason is that traditional media, with ever-shrinking resources, reports poorly on the court. Another reason is that SCC judges, with the occasional exception, do not com- municate directly with the public the way U.S. Supreme Court judges do. Such an important governance institution (argu- ably the most important) should not seem so mysterious and far away. This brings me back to the retiring chief justice, Beverley McLachlin. She has been good at presenting the face of the court to the broad community (bettered only by Justice Rosalie Abella). She has addressed important issues in the public square, notably the corrosive problem of access to justice. More of this is needed. The next chief justice should be chosen with that in mind. Meanwhile, McLachlin has written a novel, to be published in 2018 by Simon and Schuster, and there's reason to believe that she has other completed manuscripts in her desk drawer. A new career? Be careful, chief justice. Canadian novelist Michael Crummey once told an aspiring young novelist who asked for advice, "Go to dentistry school." I don't think dentistry school would work for the chief justice, but perhaps she could consider golf? Philip Slayton is working on a new book about freedom in Canada. Editor's note: Philip Slayton will continue to write for Canadian Lawyer under a new theme, in addition to his Legal Ethics col- umn, which will continue every other issue. MOTORCYCLE ACCIDENT? Consider referring your client to us Tim Boland Darcy Romaine Tel: 905-841-5717 www.bolandhowe.com THE PROOF IS IN THE PRECEDENTS Jury Verdict: (April 2014) Cockburn v. Holmes For further liability verdicts, ask for our Trial Report Card ntitled-1 1 2017-07-14 9:43 AM

• Cover