{"id":293682,"date":"2016-05-06T18:02:06","date_gmt":"2016-05-06T22:02:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/"},"modified":"2025-08-28T15:27:33","modified_gmt":"2025-08-28T19:27:33","slug":"originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/","title":{"rendered":"Originalism, Beer, and Interprovincial Trade Barriers"},"content":{"rendered":"

All three of my loyal readers may notice that I’ve been on a bit of an ‘originalism<\/a>‘ binge lately (see\u00a0post<\/a>,\u00a0post<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0post<\/a>).\u00a0 Policy Options<\/em> co-blogger L\u00e9onid Sirota and I have written a\u00a0couple<\/a>\u00a0of\u00a0papers<\/a>\u00a0on the subject of originalism (versus the \u201cliving-tree\u201d interpretation of the Canadian Constitution), in which we hope to\u00a0draw attention to this phenomenon and\u00a0discredit the somewhat simplistic\u00a0assumption, fostered in\u00a0some quarters<\/a>, that originalist analyses\u00a0are somehow verboten\u00a0in Canadian constitutional law. Despite their appalling length,\u00a0our papers\u00a0do not really get into whether\u00a0the use of originalist reasoning in Canadian\u00a0constitutional interpretation is a good or bad thing; our point is just that it’s a thing.<\/p>\n

To that end, I direct your attention\u00a0to the\u00a0new decision<\/a>\u00a0out of New Brunswick, finding unconstitutional\u00a0the prohibitions on inter-provincial liquor transportation.\u00a0The\u00a0judgment\u00a0strikes me as thoroughly originalist, and since the decision\u00a0has<\/a>\u00a0created<\/a>\u00a0some<\/a>\u00a0buzz<\/a>, it gives me a welcome\u00a0opportunity to beat this drum again.<\/p>\n

G\u00e9rard Comeau was charged under a New Brunswick statute with the offence of transporting liquor or beer across provincial borders, following a surprisingly elaborate multi-force sting operation.\u00a0 By way of a defence to that charge, Comeau asserted that the law violated section 121 of the\u00a0Constitution Act<\/em>,\u00a01867<\/em><\/a>. Here is what that provision says:<\/p>\n

121\u00a0<\/strong>All Articles of the Growth, Produce, or Manufacture of any one of the Provinces shall, from and after the Union,<\/span>be admitted free into each of the other Provinces<\/u>. (emphasis added)<\/span><\/p>\n

This,\u00a0argued Comeau, prevented the\u00a0provincial legislature\u00a0from enacting\u00a0the law\u00a0prohibiting the free admission of liquor between provinces, and under which he was charged.<\/p>\n

The only problem was that there was a rather undisturbed line of binding precedent that had read the\u00a0portion of section 121 underlined\u00a0above to\u00a0only\u00a0prohibit\u00a0interprovincial \u201ccustom duties\u201d or other such taxes (see especially\u00a0Gold Seal Ltd. v. Alberta (Attorney-General)<\/em><\/a>,\u00a0(1921),\u00a062 S.C.R. 424).\u00a0According to these precedents,\u00a0mere restrictions and prohibitions on interprovincial transportation of goods, as such,\u00a0would not run afoul of section 121, unless those restrictions were imposed by customs or duties.<\/p>\n

As the\u00a0Court frankly noted in the\u00a0Comeau<\/em>\u00a0decision, “(t)his interpretation has been applied in Canada by all provinces and territories for over 95 years”, based on the unbroken line of precedent just mentioned\u00a0(at para 51). The defendant asked the Court to break it.<\/p>\n

The Court starts out its analysis by singing from the Canadian constitutional hymnal, noting that\u00a0the Constitution must be interpreted purposively, progressively, largely and liberally, and forever in a living tree fashion (at paras 41-48).<\/p>\n

However, in actually interpreting the provision in question, the Court proceeds to refer extensively and almost exclusively\u00a0to sources favoured\u00a0less<\/em>\u00a0by so-called living constitutionalists,\u00a0and\u00a0more<\/em>\u00a0by originalist scholars and courts: namely, a close\u00a0and careful reading of the constitutional text,\u00a0as\u00a0informed by a\u00a0range\u00a0of historical sources from at or around the time the law in question was enacted.<\/p>\n

The Court finds that the Constitution does not include or imply the restrictions that\u00a0had been read-into the provision in cases like\u00a0Gold Seal<\/em>. As\u00a0the Court notes, the words ‘from customs and duties’<\/em>\u00a0form no part of section 121,\u00a0which\u00a0was considered significant\u00a0(at para 53).\u00a0 That is not, of course, the end of the analysis, otherwise we lawyers would be out of a job.<\/p>\n

Continuing the\u00a0analysis, the\u00a0Court then\u00a0employs a common originalist move, by\u00a0juxtaposing the enacted language of section 121 with a previous (but unenacted) draft version of the same text. The draft version was\u00a0more restrictive (“admitted free\u00a0into all Ports<\/em>\u00a0in Canada”, instead of just “admitted free into each of the other Provinces”),\u00a0leading to the rather natural inference\u00a0that the broader language was\u00a0intended by the drafters\u00a0to be less restrictive\u00a0(at paras 58-60).<\/p>\n

Then, using another\u00a0originalist tactic, the\u00a0Court\u00a0refers to\u00a0statutes enacted and available prior to Confederation, and that roughly mirrored the language that had essentially been adopted by the\u00a0Gold Seal<\/em>\u00a0<\/em>court.\u00a0\u00a0The Court notes that those\u00a0same\u00a0terms were not used in section 121:<\/p>\n

I find that significant. In drafting our Constitution, Mr. Reilly [a government lawyer] used wording similar to the legislative language used in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Canada to propagate interprovincial trade between the provinces. Most importantly, he did not include the words free \u201cfrom duty\u201d. [at para 63]<\/p>\n

While I will not bore readers with a full summary of the judgment, suffice to say that the rest of the Court’s constitutional analysis focused almost exclusively on historical sources, including:\u00a0various historical events leading up to Confederation; the purposes underlying Confederation, such as encouraging an economic union and the free passage of goods; the general temper of the times around Confederation (“(t)he 1860s were the high-water mark in the belief in free enterprise, in the idea that government should allow the private sector to operate with minimal regulation from government”); and even historical statements from the constitutional framers\u00a0themselves, indicating the\u00a0original intent behind the provisions\u00a0(ie. expressing a “desire to bring about that same free trade in our own colonies” and observing that\u00a0one of “the chief benefits expected to flow from the Confederation was the free interchange of the products of the labor of each province”).<\/p>\n

In short, the constitutional analysis is thoroughly originalist, as far as I can tell.<\/p>\n

For instance, there is\u00a0little by way of\u00a0a pragmatic or consequentialist\u00a0reasoning \u2013 is there a compelling purpose to have inter-provincial liquor transportation prohibitions, or inter-provincial trade barriers generally?\u00a0 Nor is there any meaningful\u00a0reliance on assumptions regarding the present needs or values of society.\u00a0 (This may be because, unlike certain contentious\u00a0Charter<\/em>\u00a0<\/em>provisions, the interpretation of obscure sections bearing on trade barriers is not an area\u00a0liable to\u00a0considerable\u00a0moral evolution over the years. One presumes Canadians have liked booze, and have not liked being charged for travelling across borders with it, rather consistently over the years.)<\/p>\n

Later in the judgment (I skip ahead here for the moment), the Court does\u00a0address the Crown’s submission that the implications of the ruling would be vast, given the\u00a0large\u00a0number\u00a0and many types\u00a0of interprovincial trade barriers that had been erected since the time of Confederation.\u00a0 Although recognizing the weight of the submission, the Court found that these considerations could not trump the clear (and original) intention behind section 121.\u00a0 Relying on one of the Supreme Court’s most utterly originalist rulings,\u00a0R. v. Blais<\/em><\/a>, [2003] 2 SCR 236, the Court in\u00a0Comeau<\/em>\u00a0<\/em>found:<\/p>\n

“The original purpose of the provision at issue” therefore, is an important consideration in approaching judicial interpretation of the Constitution. Courts should not allow such elemental and fundamental considerations to be displaced merely by notions of what, today, may amount to a request for accommodation based on a long-standing misinterpretation of the intent of the Fathers of Confederation. [para 165]<\/p>\n

And so\u00a0what about that pesky 95-year line of unbroken precedent to the contrary?\u00a0 The Court\u00a0in\u00a0Comeau<\/em>\u00a0<\/em>reviewed this line of\u00a0jurisprudence in some detail, and concluded\u00a0(blasphemously) that the Supreme Court of Canada\u00a0maybe did not do a particularly impressive job interpreting the provision.<\/p>\n

Be that as it may, lower court judges are typically not permitted\u00a0to disregard binding precedent\u00a0because they happen to think it wrong or ill-advised; they are\u00a0normally bound by it regardless, according to the principle sometimes called “vertical\u00a0stare decisis<\/em>” (\u201cto stand by things decided\u201d in order to confuse non-lawyers.<\/p>\n

The Court acknowledged this constraint,\u00a0and noted\u00a0that departing from clear and binding precedent should only be done with caution and for compelling reasons (para 118).\u00a0 However, the Court here drew upon some recent decisions of the Supreme Court itself\u00a0(most notably\u00a0Bedford<\/em><\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Carter<\/em><\/a>) in which the top\u00a0Court effectively overruled its own precedents from a few decades prior.\u00a0\u00a0In those cases, the Supreme Court\u00a0found that lower courts may also\u00a0depart from binding precedent, where either (1) a new legal issue is raised,\u00a0or (2)\u00a0 there is a change in the circumstances or evidence that “fundamentally shifts the parameters of the debate.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Court in\u00a0Comeau<\/em>\u00a0found that while the first rationale did not apply,\u00a0Gold Seal<\/em>\u00a0could be reconsidered on the basis of the second,\u00a0“new evidence” exception. What was that new evidence? A bunch of historical information about the original purposes and meaning of the provision in question.<\/p>\n

Of course, this is not exactly\u00a0new<\/em>\u00a0evidence.\u00a0 It’s the opposite of new evidence.\u00a0 It’s very old evidence.\u00a0 But it was new\u00a0to the court<\/em>, as far as can be told from the previous judgments, and therefore, in this Court’s view,\u00a0provided sufficient license\u00a0to disregard cases like\u00a0Gold Seal.<\/em>\u00a0<\/em>This new-old evidence “allows this Court to proceed with its analysis and indeed mandates that it do so”(at para 125).<\/p>\n

There is lots to mull over in this judgment.\u00a0 Leaving aside other substantive discussions on interesting issues of law, the case even\u00a0included\u00a0the “shocking allegation”\u00a0that certain Supreme Court\u00a0judges\u00a0from the\u00a0Gold Seal<\/em>\u00a0era had met with and been influenced by\u00a0the then-minister of justice, prior to issuing their ruling in that case. This section of the judgment was particularly\u00a0gripping and\u00a0dramatic, albeit I am sure only in relative terms (sadly for me, one does not typically encounter scandalous accusations of\u00a0high-political intrigue in constitutional law cases).<\/p>\n

In any event, given\u00a0its\u00a0potentially vast implications (discussed by Marni Soupcoff\u00a0here<\/a>, and by the Court at paras 150-165), one suspects that more attention will paid to this decision \u2013 and the\u00a0type of constitutional analysis underlying it \u2013 moving forward.<\/p>\n

But in the meantime, if you’re in Canada and\u00a0approve of the free flow of booze across provincial borders: thank an originalist, if you can find one.<\/p>\n

Photo:\u00a0Library and Archives Canada<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

Do you have something to say about the article you just read? Be part of the<\/em>\u00a0<\/em>Policy Options\u00a0<\/em>discussion, and send in your own submission. Here is a<\/em>\u00a0<\/em>link<\/em><\/a>\u00a0<\/em>on how to do it. |\u00a0Souhaitez-vous r\u00e9agir \u00e0 cet article ? <\/em>Joignez-vous aux d\u00e9bats d\u2019<\/em>Options politiques\u00a0<\/em>et soumettez-nous votre texte en suivant ces<\/em>\u00a0<\/em>directives<\/em><\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

All three of my loyal readers may notice that I’ve been on a bit of an ‘originalism‘ binge lately (see\u00a0post,\u00a0post\u00a0and\u00a0post).\u00a0 Policy Options co-blogger L\u00e9onid Sirota and I have written a\u00a0couple\u00a0of\u00a0papers\u00a0on the subject of originalism (versus the \u201cliving-tree\u201d interpretation of the Canadian Constitution), in which we hope to\u00a0draw attention to this phenomenon and\u00a0discredit the somewhat simplistic\u00a0assumption, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":913,"featured_media":293680,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"content-type":"","ep_exclude_from_search":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"article-status":[],"irpp-category":[],"section":[],"irpp-tag":[],"class_list":["post-293682","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nOriginalism, Beer, and Interprovincial Trade Barriers<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"fr_FR\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Originalism, Beer, and Interprovincial Trade Barriers\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"All three of my loyal readers may notice that I’ve been on a bit of an ‘originalism‘ binge lately (see\u00a0post,\u00a0post\u00a0and\u00a0post).\u00a0 Policy Options co-blogger L\u00e9onid Sirota and I have written a\u00a0couple\u00a0of\u00a0papers\u00a0on the subject of originalism (versus the \u201cliving-tree\u201d interpretation of the Canadian Constitution), in which we hope to\u00a0draw attention to this phenomenon and\u00a0discredit the somewhat simplistic\u00a0assumption, […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Policy Options\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/IRPP.org\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2016-05-06T22:02:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-08-28T19:27:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/WordPress-Image-fathers-of-confederation.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"2000\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"700\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"vkurzawa\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@irpp\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@irpp\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"vkurzawa\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/\",\"name\":\"Originalism, Beer, and Interprovincial Trade Barriers\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/WordPress-Image-fathers-of-confederation.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2016-05-06T22:02:06+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-08-28T19:27:33+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/#\/schema\/person\/caa28d6bbc41d147877478e79aa84e6e\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/WordPress-Image-fathers-of-confederation.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/WordPress-Image-fathers-of-confederation.png\",\"width\":2000,\"height\":700},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Originalism, Beer, and Interprovincial Trade Barriers\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/\",\"name\":\"Policy Options\",\"description\":\"Institute for Research on Public Policy\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/#\/schema\/person\/caa28d6bbc41d147877478e79aa84e6e\",\"name\":\"vkurzawa\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/000fc191cb4be23411c2528f5429f16b0d72633aac55540779eff4743edb6867?s=96&d=https%3A%2F%2Fpolicyoptions.irpp.org%2Fwp-content%2Fthemes%2Fsimone-blog%2Fimages%2Fmysteryman.png&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/000fc191cb4be23411c2528f5429f16b0d72633aac55540779eff4743edb6867?s=96&d=https%3A%2F%2Fpolicyoptions.irpp.org%2Fwp-content%2Fthemes%2Fsimone-blog%2Fimages%2Fmysteryman.png&r=g\",\"caption\":\"vkurzawa\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/author\/vkurzawa\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Originalism, Beer, and Interprovincial Trade Barriers","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/","og_locale":"fr_FR","og_type":"article","og_title":"Originalism, Beer, and Interprovincial Trade Barriers","og_description":"All three of my loyal readers may notice that I’ve been on a bit of an ‘originalism‘ binge lately (see\u00a0post,\u00a0post\u00a0and\u00a0post).\u00a0 Policy Options co-blogger L\u00e9onid Sirota and I have written a\u00a0couple\u00a0of\u00a0papers\u00a0on the subject of originalism (versus the \u201cliving-tree\u201d interpretation of the Canadian Constitution), in which we hope to\u00a0draw attention to this phenomenon and\u00a0discredit the somewhat simplistic\u00a0assumption, […]","og_url":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/","og_site_name":"Policy Options","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/IRPP.org","article_published_time":"2016-05-06T22:02:06+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-08-28T19:27:33+00:00","og_image":[{"width":2000,"height":700,"url":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/WordPress-Image-fathers-of-confederation.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"vkurzawa","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@irpp","twitter_site":"@irpp","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"vkurzawa","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/","url":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/","name":"Originalism, Beer, and Interprovincial Trade Barriers","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/WordPress-Image-fathers-of-confederation.png","datePublished":"2016-05-06T22:02:06+00:00","dateModified":"2025-08-28T19:27:33+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/#\/schema\/person\/caa28d6bbc41d147877478e79aa84e6e"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"fr-FR","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"fr-FR","@id":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/WordPress-Image-fathers-of-confederation.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/WordPress-Image-fathers-of-confederation.png","width":2000,"height":700},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2016\/05\/originalism-beer-interprovincial-trade-barriers\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Originalism, Beer, and Interprovincial Trade Barriers"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/#website","url":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/","name":"Policy Options","description":"Institute for Research on Public Policy","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"fr-FR"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/#\/schema\/person\/caa28d6bbc41d147877478e79aa84e6e","name":"vkurzawa","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"fr-FR","@id":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/000fc191cb4be23411c2528f5429f16b0d72633aac55540779eff4743edb6867?s=96&d=https%3A%2F%2Fpolicyoptions.irpp.org%2Fwp-content%2Fthemes%2Fsimone-blog%2Fimages%2Fmysteryman.png&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/000fc191cb4be23411c2528f5429f16b0d72633aac55540779eff4743edb6867?s=96&d=https%3A%2F%2Fpolicyoptions.irpp.org%2Fwp-content%2Fthemes%2Fsimone-blog%2Fimages%2Fmysteryman.png&r=g","caption":"vkurzawa"},"url":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/author\/vkurzawa\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/293682","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/913"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=293682"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/293682\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":295201,"href":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/293682\/revisions\/295201"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/293680"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=293682"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=293682"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=293682"},{"taxonomy":"article-status","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article-status?post=293682"},{"taxonomy":"irpp-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/irpp-category?post=293682"},{"taxonomy":"section","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/section?post=293682"},{"taxonomy":"irpp-tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/irpp-tag?post=293682"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}