I do want to say that I think it's very important to have properly resourced equality rights funding reinstated as well, so it's not to diminish that in any way. But in my experience, many of the key cases the court has been hearing and will continue to hear either have an intersection with other rights—so there's an equality dimension to the case, or there are other fundamental rights at issue—or the strength of their legal merit is not necessarily under section 15. But it doesn't mean that they don't benefit vulnerable and disadvantaged groups.
I'll give you a couple of examples of recent cases that have been argued in the Supreme Court of Canada. The Bedford case a couple of years ago involved challenges to Criminal Code provisions that criminalized aspects of sex work. There are definite equality components to that case, and there was a section 15 argument—a small one, not very robust—argued in the case. It was primarily a section 7 case—life, liberty, and security of the person.
Most recently—it's been in the news again—was the Carter case on physician-assisted dying. There are important equality aspects to that case, but it's also fundamentally a section 7 case. So I think section 7, for sure.
Section 2 rights, when you think about freedom of religion, freedom of association, freedom of peaceful assembly.... I'm missing one.