Continuing the Conversation: A Reply to Manfredi and Kelly

“Continuing the Conversation: A Reply to Manfredi and Kelly” (2004) 49 McGill Law Journal 765-778 (with C. Hunter) (a reply to C.P. Manfredi & J.B. Kelly, “Misrepresenting the Supreme Court’s Record? A Comment on Choudhry and Hunter” (2003) 49 McGill Law Journal 741-764).

Full Version (PDF)
In this reply, the authors assert that Professors Manfredi and Kelly’s response to their original article either misses the point or is simply mistaken. The authors clarify the limited purpose of their original study, which was to assess the extent to which the Supreme Court is counter-majoritarian under the Charter. Manfredi and Kelly’s interpretation of the available data either relies on inappropriate quantitative measures or draws overly fine distinctions between highly variable data sets. The burden of proof is on those who allege that the Court is engaged in judicial activism, and Manfredi and Kelly have not succeeded in demonstrating that the null hypothesis has been disproved