One of American jurist Antonin Scalia’s most consequential contributions was to give law students and aspiring jurists an intellectual framework for challenging the prevailing progressive jurisprudential consensus. Many instinctively disagreed with it but lacked the ideas and vocabulary to articulate an alternative. His judgments and writings helped equip a generation that would reshape American constitutional law. If a comparable intellectual shift is to come to Canada, three recent lectures deserve attention. The first two are Supreme Court Justice Malcolm Rowe’s March 2026 lectures on the relationship between the Charter and liberal democracy. The @RunnymedeSoc has released them together as a podcast episode: runnymedesociety.ca/en/the-c… The third is a recent lecture by former Supreme Court Justice Russell Brown, hosted by @GeoffSigalet and the @ubc_ccl. It's a tour de force on the separation of powers, its relationship to individual liberty, and the need to scrutinize power exercised by every branch of government—including the courts: youtube.com/watch?v=-AjKVTmy… What makes this kind of intellectual work important is its capacity to turn instinctive dissent into a developed constitutional argument. Students and aspiring jurists need to encounter serious alternatives to the assumptions that prevail in their classrooms and profession. Scalia showed how consequential it can be to give people the intellectual confidence—and the vocabulary—to disagree. Rowe and Brown deserve tremendous credit for doing the same.