Canadian theorist, he comes at this argument very differently, he thinks the charter is an awful idea. This terms is hard to use, everyone wants to support the hard working. Canadian family but what about the singles: he says in his operating thesis is that working people are better off with a system we had before there was a charter than with a charter. Charter gives more power for people who already have power: a very different theorist charter skeptics, the charter was sold to canadians. In fact, whats difficult that people were not told form the charter is that it change the way in which democracy function. Mandel is a big fan of democracy than he is of the poor. If judges are just making decisions based on the charter why does it matter what o perspective they are coming from, if they are judging based on interpreting the law, why does it matter.