Were these arguments successful at the court at first instance, and what are the nature of those arguments to try to get around the use of the notwithstanding clause?

I wasn't involved at the trial level, but I watched it unfold and, and I read the trial judgment, and it was what I will call the kitchen sink of legal arguments that were thrown at Bill 21.

The, the parties and interveners brought a host of constitutional arguments, aside from the obvious Charter grounds, because those are shielded by the notwithstanding clause, but they're trying to sidestep all of that by looking at other parts of the Constitution and other parts of the Charter.

Um, so the result is that the challenge itself now touches on so many parts of the Canadian Constitution, and in many ways, I think even the foundations of our Constitution.

So I'll run through, uh, just to give a flavor of, of what was brought forward, and there's kind of two groups.

There's non-Charter arguments, and then there's Charter arguments that don't involve the notwithstanding clause.

So first, in the non-Charter world, this is not a comprehensive list of everything that was brought, but I'll hit the main ones.

Marion, could you briefly des- describe what that is all about?