| Summary: | This paper analyzes the recent decision of the British Columbia Supreme Court in City of Victoria v. Adams. Specifically, the paper considers three interlocking themes that emerge from the decision: (1) the nature of “public space” in the context of homelessness; (2) the autonomy of homeless individuals; and (3) the meaning and value of the “homeless body.” With reference to each theme, the paper explores how the judgment in Adams grapples with the purportedly normative “Law and Economics”- type arguments put forth by the City of Victoria. By drawing on insights from Critical Legal Studies theory and feminist jurisprudence, the paper shows that Adams subverts and destabilizes certain “normative” perspectives about public space and homelessness. However, the paper goes on to argue that in its conflation of “cardboard box” shelters with the “invisible fences” envisioned by Justice Wilson in Morgentaler, Adams presents an ambiguous victory for anti-poverty advocates. The paper argues that the decision may serve to increase barriers for a broader and more progressive understanding of section 7 in the future.
|
|---|
