Publication

This essay narrates an exchange of communication between the Supreme Court of Canada and the European Court of Human Rights in relations to a central component of the domestic legal regime of dealing with non-citizens who allegedly pose a threat to national security. The author examines the legal practice of citing another state's jurisprudence or legislation by a national court. She shows that the commonly shared assumption that such comparative undertakings are accurate and systematic is questionable in the light of the observed legal practice.