{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

A reasonable conclusion can be then drawn that most

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: rational and informed. Justice Lefsrud further stated that “in the absence of an age requirement, babies… would be eligible to vote” (Lefsrud). Rational Connection There is some debate as to whether this condition would be met. To the extent that section 3 of the Canada Elections Act restricts babies from voting, it is rationally connected to the legislative objective as outlined by Lefsrud J. above. However, there is debate as to whether 16 or 17 year olds are of sufficient maturity to make rational and informed decisions with respect to their representation in government. This will be addressed in the next part of the Oakes Test. Minimal Impairment Justice Lefsrud in his decision stated the following in his reasons for decision in Fitzgerald v. Alberta, supra: It can be assumed that by age 18 most individuals will have completed high school social studies courses giving them some information about our political system and our history as a nation. The completion of these courses gives these individuals important background knowledge for rational and informed voting. I am aware that age 18 does not coincide for every individual with graduation from high school. Some graduate when they are younger than 18, some turn 18 after they graduate, and some do not graduate at all. I am also aware that many individuals are forced to make difficult life choices, such...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}