The final episode sets Quebec’s law inside two larger models for managing pluralism: French republicanism, which emphasizes a common culture and the general will, and Anglo liberalism, which emphasizes individual conscience and the recognition of difference.
It traces those models to their Catholic and Protestant roots, to the civil-law and common-law traditions, and to the 2004 Amselem ruling that defined religion as a sincerely held individual belief.
The episode then turns to the constitutional core of the dispute: parliamentary sovereignty versus judicial review, and Quebec’s use of the notwithstanding clause, which it did not consent to in 1982.
Is Quebec charting a distinct third way, or a path the rest of Canada will eventually face?
