Asper Centre Clinic

Meet Megan Savard, the Asper Centre’s new Constitutional Litigator in Residence for Fall 2025

Posted on by Tal Schreier

By Tyler Lee & Romina Hajizadeh 

During her term at Downtown Legal Services, a young and eager Megan Savard was called upon by an elderly man who had been accused of a domestic assault. He struggled with the weight and bureaucracy of the legal system, and Savard was his last hope to defend the case. Based on her interactions with the accused, Savard sensed something was wrong with the charge. Her intuitions were vindicated when, while carefully scanning a pile of evidence, Savard eventually found a photograph depicting a lock of hair ripped from the man’s head — a crucial piece of exculpatory evidence indicating that he was not the aggressor. Savard was hooked: from that moment onwards, she knew that she wanted to be a lawyer representing people in need of legal services, helping them navigate the justice system through their toughest challenges. 

We heard this story and many more while speaking with Savard about her career so far, her constitutional law expertise, and what she’s looking forward to in her new role as the Litigator in Residence at the David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights. We are thrilled to have Megan play an integral role in the Asper Centre student clinical program, which allows students to gain practical experience in constitutional litigation. 

Megan Savard’s legal journey began at the University of Toronto, Faculty of Law, where she was a member of the inaugural cohort of student clinicians at the Asper Centre. There, she partnered with OJEN to develop a trial advocacy program for students in rural Ontario. Savard felt as though she was, in some ways, “introducing a brand-new way of looking at the justice system.” In other ways, however, she was conscious of her positionality as a white woman presenting a colonial system. Mindful of this, her goal was to make the justice system as approachable and accessible as possible. For Savard, this experienced reinforced the fact that the justice system is a Western construct, and it is Canada’s obligation to make that system as inclusive as possible. Ultimately, her experience as a clinical student was extremely profound, showing her that the justice system is not solely about individual clients – in many ways, it is also about pursuing “macro-level” change.  

After law school, Savard set out to make an impact in the field of criminal law. When asked about what drew her to criminal law in particular, Savard explained that criminal law was particularly high stakes owing to the relationship between the Crown and the accused, and liberty interests at stake with cases involving potential incarceration. Though Savard noted that clients might not always be an external source of validation, she felt that her work involved shining a light on state-perpetuated injustice and vindicating the rights of society at large, rather than just one client. This inspires her relentless pursuit of justice. 

During her time at a boutique litigation firm, Savard developed strong litigation skills with a particular focus on winning the hearts of jurists and judges. When asked about her view on what makes for successful litigation in constitutional matters, Savard explained that litigators will rarely win the day if the triers of fact cannot intuitively grasp the ramifications of state excess or state overreach. Savard noted that coming equipped with easily digestible arguments (and several alternative arguments) increases a litigator’s chances of success. 

Equipped with these skills, Savard founded Savards LLP in 2021. Though Savard explained that there are quite a few “headaches” that come along with managing a firm, she explained that she enjoyed the freedom to take control of the way she does business and the clients she takes on. She wanted to maintain a practice purely in criminal law with an emphasis on assisting low-income, marginalized clients.  

When asked what misconceptions surround her practice and constitutional litigation more broadly, Savard pushed against the notion of defendants “getting off” of Charter violations on a technicality. She noted the recent Quebec Court of Appeal decision in Luamba as an example, illustrating how such litigation can unveil systemic discrimination towards marginalized communities in our justice system. “To be able to shine a spotlight on that and hold the state accountable… you could never call that a technicality.”  

Now, Savard is returning to the University of Toronto, where her legal career began. In what is a full-circle moment from her time as a member of the Asper Centre’s inaugural cohort of clinical students, she will now serve as our Litigator in Residence for the 2025/26 academic year. She hopes to positively impact the Asper Centre by getting students involved at every stage of litigation. Savard noted that the Asper Centre clinical program allows students to get the experience of being the client (in the context of interventions), while simultaneously taking a big picture look at the law. For her, this “combination of practical exposure to the trade of law” alongside the big picture perspective the Asper Centre takes to constitutional issues is what gets her most excited for the clinic.  

Ultimately, Savard sees the clinic as a space for her to learn as well. “Students are in the business of learning and questioning” our legal institutions, creating an environment that allows practitioners to revisit old notions of how to practice law. 

Read more about Megan’s appointment here and listen to Megan giving a master class in criminal defense remedies in a recent episode of the Asper Centre’s Charter: A Course podcast.

Tyler Lee & Romina Hajizadeh are rising 2Ls at the Faculty of Law and the 2025 Asper Centre summer research assistants.

Megan Savard Named Fall 2025 Constitutional Litigator in Residence

Posted on by Tal Schreier

We are delighted to announce that Megan Savard has been selected as the Asper Centre’s Constitutional Litigator in Residence for Fall 2025.

Megan will co-teach the Asper Centre’s Clinic Course alongside Executive Director Cheryl Milne during the Fall 2025 term. This upper-year course at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law offers students a unique opportunity to engage directly in Charter rights advocacy, including constitutional litigation.

With her deep expertise in constitutional litigation and criminal defence law, Megan will bring invaluable insight and experience to the Clinic. She will support student work on a range of impactful projects, including criminal law-related interventions and the Asper Centre’s ongoing Voting Age Charter challenge.

We look forward to welcoming Megan and to the exciting contributions she will bring to the Centre and our students.

Megan Savard is a partner at Savards LLP. She practices criminal, constitutional and regulatory law, with a particular focus on sexual offences, privacy law, and complex constitutional litigation. Her client-focused approach ensures that the justice system works for her clients, not against them.

Megan is an experienced trial and appellate advocate, appearing regularly at all levels of court, including the Supreme Court of Canada. She has been counsel in some of Canada’s highest-profile cases. Megan is consulted by individuals and organizations on criminal and constitutional issues. She acts as duty counsel for the Ontario Court of Appeal’s Inmate Appeal Duty Counsel Program. Megan is recognized by Best Lawyers in Canada in Appellate Practice and Criminal Defence.

Megan is an active leader in Canada’s premier advocacy organizations. She is a past Director of the Criminal Lawyers’ Association, and has co-chaired its Litigation Committee.

Megan is a sought-after speaker on criminal law issues. She lectures frequently at conferences and universities, and educates judges, lawyers and police officers about emerging issues. Megan teaches Trial Advocacy at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law and has served on the faculty of the Federation of Law Societies of Canada’s National Criminal Law Program. She also provides expert testimony about criminal law issues in non-criminal tribunals.

In 2019, Megan received the Precedent Setter Award, which recognizes lawyers for excellence and leadership in the legal community. In 2024, Toronto Life recognized her as one of the 50 Most Influential Torontonians for her representation of high-profile clients.

View the Asper Centre’s past Constitutional Litigators in Residence HERE.

Meet Mary Birdsell, the Asper Centre’s new Constitutional Litigator in Residence for Fall 2024

Posted on by Tal Schreier

by Kate Shackleton 

From working directly with young clients to arguing cases at the Supreme Court of Canada, Mary Birdsell has advocated on behalf of children and youth for more than 25 years.  This fall, she will share her knowledge of children and youth justice, constitutional law, and appellate litigation with students in the Asper Centre’s clinic course as the Constitutional Litigator-in-Residence. I recently spoke with Birdsell about her career so far, her constitutional law expertise, and what she’s looking forward to her in her new role.  

Originally from Alberta, Birdsell chose to attend law school at Dalhousie University. She opted for Dalhousie because she was curious about living elsewhere and eager to meet classmates from across the country. When she started law school, she recalls being uncertain if she wanted to be a lawyer. However, she was drawn to law because she thought “it would be an interesting and excellent education in how society functions.” She notes that her first-year courses covering constitutional law, human rights, and the Charter affirmed her decision to pursue a law degree, since they were “exactly what [she] was interested in.”  

After graduating law school,  Birdsell articled with a full-service corporate law firm in Toronto where – coincidentally – her first case focused on section 15 of the Charter. She worked on behalf of an intervener in Thibaudeau v Canada – which examined the rule that child support payments were taxable on the receiving parents – under the tutelage of Mary Eberts and Steve Tenai.  

Following her articles, Birdsell joined Justice for Children and Youth (where she now serves as Executive Director). She knew that clinic work appealed to her thanks to the semester she spent working full-time at Dalhousie’s legal clinic and she was particularly interested in Justice for Children and Youth because of her pre-law experiences working with youth.  

During her time at Justice for Children and Youth, the organization has been involved in a number of landmark cases in the youth justice sphere – many of which centre on Charter rights. When I asked her to identify highlight cases, it was difficult for her to choose a select few. In terms of having a meaningful impact, R v D.B. came to mind first. The case, in which Asper Centre Executive Director Cheryl Milne was counsel for Justice for Children and Youth, established that diminished moral blameworthiness for youth is a principle of fundamental justice under section 7. More recently, she pointed to Justice for Children and Youth’s intervention in R. v Le,  where the Supreme Court of Canada affirmed that race relations inform the detention analysis under section 9 of the Charter.  

Although not every case has yielded the outcome she hoped for, she described constitutional litigation as a “powerful tool” in the hands of youth justice advocates. She observed that the Charter offers a “fundamental path” to confront some of the most pressing issues facing Canadian youth, such as the Saskatchewan law requiring parental consent for students under 16 to change their name or pronouns.  

For Birdsell, evidence is the key to success in constitutional litigation. She stressed that evidence is especially important in equality-based litigation, since evidence is how litigants demonstrate that “oppression is happening the way you say it is.” Especially when organizations like police services or family services are being challenged, as often happens in the youth justice context, she explained that evidence is crucial to “switch the vantage point” for courts.  

When asked if she had any advice for law students, she encouraged students to follow what interests them. For those considering public interest work, she emphasized that there are many places where you can do public interest work, including government positions and at big firms. She also highlighted the value of being well-educated in constitutional law, since it empowers you to spot Charter issues “where others might not.”  

As the incoming Asper Centre Litigator-in-Residence, Birdsell is excited to interact with and learn from students. She also welcomes the opportunity to take a pause from front-line work and spend time thinking “a little more broadly and deeply about the law.” On the voting age challenge, which will form an important part of the clinic students’ work this fall, Birdsell described the case as going beyond just the right to vote. At its core, she said, the case is about how youth “ought to be able to participate in decision-making about the present and future.”  

Kate Shackleton is a rising 2L JD Candidate at the Faculty of Law and is an Asper Centre Summer Research Assistant. 

Extended Deadline for Asper Centre Clinic Course

Attention current Upper Year students at Uof T Law!

There are spaces available in the Asper Centre Fall clinic for upper year students.

Please send your one-page statement of interest to Executive Director Cheryl Milne (cheryl.milne@utoronto.ca) by 5:00 p.m. Monday, August 19th.

Asper Centre takes part in the Vote16 Summit in Ottawa

Posted on by Tal Schreier

By Vlad Mirel and Kate Shackleton

On May 29, 2024, academics, parliamentarians, and youth activists from across the globe gathered in Ottawa for Canada’s first-ever national Vote16 Summit. The event was organized by Vote16 Canada – a national campaign dedicated to lowering the voting age to 16 – and hosted by Senator Marilou McPhedran. 

To kick off the event, numerous experts presented evidence in favour of lowering the voting age to 16. Panelist Samantha Reusch (Executive Director, Apathy is Boring) stressed that the declining civic engagement Canada is experiencing presents a direct threat to the efficacy of its democracy. She emphasized that although youth feel alienated from the democratic process, they remain interested in politics. Sabreena Delhon illustrated how the pandemic negatively impacted civic engagement by removing students from schools and thus reducing their interaction with civic education. Lastly, Dr. Jan Eichhorn (Senior Lecturer/Research Director, University of Edinburgh) spoke about Scotland’s experience with lowering the voting age to 16, highlighting that Scottish youth became more politically-engaged than their UK peers who were not enfranchised. 

In the subsequent Q&A session, the panelists addressed audience concerns about social media and misinformation along with the partisan dimension of the voting age debate. The panelists expressed that many of the concerns that social media may unduly influence youth voting are already true for older generations. Furthermore, Professor Eichhorn outlined the non-partisan nature of the lowered voting age in Germany. 

Dr. Jan Eichhorn, Samantha Reusch, and Sabreena Delhon answer audience questions

Next up was the “Vote16 in Court” panel, featuring Sage Garrett and Caeden Tipler from Make It 16 New Zealand, Jacob Colatosti and Catherine He, who are two of the youth litigants involved in the ongoing voting age Charter challenge, and the Asper Centre’s Executive Director Cheryl Milne. 

Garrett and Tipler shared how Make It 16 New Zealand challenged the voting age based on the New Zealand Bill of Rights, which prohibits age discrimination against persons 16 years of age and older. They took their case all the way up to the Supreme Court, where the court held that the voting age was indeed inconsistent with the Bill of Rights. Although New Zealand’s parliamentary supremacy means that the government is not bound by the Court’s decision, Garrett and Tipler underscored that the case played a major role in raising awareness about their campaign. 

Next, Milne provided an update on the Canadian Charter challenge (led by the Asper Centre and Justice for Children and Youth). She explained that the government’s evidence has been reviewed and preparations for cross-examinations are underway. Colatosti and He also described how they got involved in the case and why youth voting is important to them. Colatosti was motivated to join the case when he was 16 due to his dissatisfaction with the rate of reform within Canadian politics. Meanwhile, He – who joined the litigation at 15 – voiced her support for enfranchising youth based on their position as “citizens, driving the future of change.”  

All five panelists then answered questions from the audience and noted some of the frequent questions they face. The panelists pointed out that Canada’s political cycle often results in the minimum voting age differing from when people actually get their first voting opportunity, with 19-year-old Colatosti still waiting to cast his first vote. In response to concerns that youth are too extreme or radical to vote, Garrrett stressed that no one should ever be disenfranchised based on their political opinions. Colatosti and He emphasized that parental influence is also not a persuasive counterargument, observing that youth are equally capable of influencing their parents. 

Panelists Caeden Tipler, Sage Garrett, Catherine He, Jacob Colatosti, and Cheryl Milne discuss the court challenges in New Zealand and Canada

The final panel – “Building Our Movement” – was composed of youth activists from across Canada (from various Vote16 chapters, the Fédération de la jeunesse franco-ontarienne, and the Francophone Youth Council) and international advocates like Bethania Lima from Brazil and Dr. Andrew Wilkes, who is the Chief Policy & Advocacy Officer of Generation Citizen in New York. The speakers encouraged those interested in advocating for legislative change to focus on drawing attention to their campaign and to reach out to local politicians. 

Bethania Lima (at far left) discusses how Brazil increased youth voter registration for the 2022 election

The Summit concluded with a symposium of more than 25 speakers who gave concise presentations on why they believed youth should be able to vote. Elder Verna McGregor welcomed the attendees. She analogized her dreamcatcher’s interwoven net to society itself, emphasizing how we are all interconnected and thus every voice must be heard in elections.  Several parliamentarians then expressed their support for lowering the voting age, such as Senators Robert Black, Kim Pate and Bernadette Clement as well as MPs Elizabeth May and Taylor Bachrach. Notably, Bachrach credited the youth litigants in the Charter challenge with inspiring the Private Member’s Bill to lower the voting age that he brought forward in 2021. MP Yves Perron of the Bloc-Quebecois outlined the important habit-forming impact voting at 16 would have. He stressed that youth voting is important not just for young people, but for the overall health of our democracy. Katie Yu and Amelia Penney-Crocker spoke on behalf of the youth litigants, with Yu commenting that lowering the voting age is about “treating young people as people.” 

MP Bachrach with the youth litigants (from left to right: Amelia Penney-Crocker, Katie Yu, Jacob Colatosti, and Catherine He)

Katie Yu and Amelia Penney-Crocker speak during the symposium portion of the Summit

Overall, the Vote16 Summit was an informative and inspiring event that promises to make important contributions to the movement for extending the vote to young people. By bringing together this diverse group of people with differing lived experiences and expertise, the Vote16 Summit provided its attendees with an incredibly enriching conversation surrounding youth voting. In addition to the ongoing Charter challenge, legislative change may be on the horizon thanks to Bill S-201 (introduced by Senator McPhedran). The bill is expected to go to Second Reading in the Senate in the near future, and to ensure the bill passes, interested individuals and organizations are encouraged to contact their provincial senators to express their support. A list of senators for each province as well as a statement in support of S-201 can be found on the Vote16 website. 

Emily Chan (Lawyer, Justice for Children and Youth), Mary Birdsell (Executive Director, Justice for Children and Youth), Katie Yu, Amelia Penney-Crocker, Jacob Colatosti, Catherine He (Youth Litigants), and Cheryl Milne (Executive Director, Asper Centre) 

Vlad Mirel and Kate Shackleton are rising 2L students at the Faculty of Law and are the current Summer Research Assistants at the Asper Centre.