{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Ottawa Law Review","provider_url":"https:\/\/rdo-olr.org\/fr\/","author_name":"rdo-olr","author_url":"https:\/\/rdo-olr.org\/fr\/author\/rdo-olr\/","title":"\u00c9pisode 13: Une prorogation d\u00e9voy\u00e9e ? - Ottawa Law Review","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"bfXAmpIH5E\"><a href=\"https:\/\/rdo-olr.org\/fr\/podcasts\/episode-13-une-prorogation-devoyee\/\">\u00c9pisode 13: Une prorogation d\u00e9voy\u00e9e ?<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/rdo-olr.org\/fr\/podcasts\/episode-13-une-prorogation-devoyee\/embed\/#?secret=bfXAmpIH5E\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"\u00ab\u00a0\u00c9pisode 13: Une prorogation d\u00e9voy\u00e9e ?\u00a0\u00bb &#8212; Ottawa Law Review\" data-secret=\"bfXAmpIH5E\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/* <![CDATA[ *\/\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/\/# sourceURL=https:\/\/rdo-olr.org\/wp-includes\/js\/wp-embed.min.js\n\/* ]]> *\/\n<\/script>\n","description":"Dans cet \u00e9pisode, la professeure Vanessa MacDonnell se joint aux r\u00e9dacteurs et r\u00e9dactrice associ\u00e9.e.s Devon Lamont, Stephanie Katajamaki et Zach Auger pour diss\u00e9quer MacKinnon v Canada (Attorney General), qui conteste la d\u00e9cision de l'ancien Premier ministre Justin Trudeau de proroger le Parlement en janvier 2025. Dans le cadre de cette discussion, la gestionnaire de soumissions, anglais, Mallory Dunlop, explique comment elle a aid\u00e9 un intervenant, le Canadian Constitutional Law Initiative, \u00e0 pr\u00e9parer leur m\u00e9moire."}