> The SCC ruled that it was under the federal government's enumerated powers To clarify, I said the POGG was the catch-all provision. This is semantics and we

> The SCC ruled that it was under the federal government's enumerated powers To clarify, I said the POGG was the catch-all provision. This is semantics and we directionally agree, but I wouldn't characterize the POGG as an "enumerated power". If the CA constitution explicitly said the CA federal govt. has the ability to place a federal carbon tax, then that'd be an enumerated power. Due to a lack of an enumerated federal carbon tax power, advocates had to rely on the [implied power from the] "catch all" POGG provision. Your article goes into why it's not an enumerated power (and consistent with my interpretation): > Very briefly, the federal and provincial governments get their power to pass legislation from sections 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867 respectively.[7] These two sections list a bunch of subject matters and, essentially, each government can only pass legislation dealing with the subjects that it has been assigned. This is why the provinces deal with health care and education, whereas the federal government deals with the criminal law and the military. All of your articles were interesting. Thank you. edit: Checking wikipedia about the context of Canada's POGG provision[0], there's more explanation as to why POGG's not an enumerated power, but this is all semantics and above my intellect. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace,_order,_and_good_government#Canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace,_order,_and_good_governm...