Courtrooms, campus corridors, mountain slopes, and border tarmacs: we connect them through three rulings that change how you navigate rights, rules, and risk. We start with a Vancouver Island University protest case where banners, ladders, and megaphones escalated into disruptions of exams. The student fought a two‑year suspension, arguing misidentification, unfair process, and—most ambitiously—freedom of expression under the Charter. We walk through why the court said no, revisiting Dolphin ...
All content for Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan is the property of Michael Mulligan and is served directly from their servers
with no modification, redirects, or rehosting. The podcast is not affiliated with or endorsed by Podjoint in any way.
Courtrooms, campus corridors, mountain slopes, and border tarmacs: we connect them through three rulings that change how you navigate rights, rules, and risk. We start with a Vancouver Island University protest case where banners, ladders, and megaphones escalated into disruptions of exams. The student fought a two‑year suspension, arguing misidentification, unfair process, and—most ambitiously—freedom of expression under the Charter. We walk through why the court said no, revisiting Dolphin ...
Where do your constitutional protections begin and end? The dividing line between private actions and state authority forms the heart of a fascinating BC Court of Appeal decision that clarifies when ordinary citizens become "agents of the police." The case centers on Loomis Courier employees who, at police direction, set aside suspicious packages for warrantless seizure during a drug investigation. Unlike previous cases involving independent security guards or school administrators, these em...
Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan
Courtrooms, campus corridors, mountain slopes, and border tarmacs: we connect them through three rulings that change how you navigate rights, rules, and risk. We start with a Vancouver Island University protest case where banners, ladders, and megaphones escalated into disruptions of exams. The student fought a two‑year suspension, arguing misidentification, unfair process, and—most ambitiously—freedom of expression under the Charter. We walk through why the court said no, revisiting Dolphin ...
