There's a line you wrote in an article for the National Post that I'd like to ask you to elaborate on. You wrote, “We trusted that these institutions”—by “institutions”, you were referring, in part, to the administrative state—“would commit to their own restraint.... We have been tragically naïve.”
Can you comment on what “restraint” means in this context and, for the purpose of freedom of expression, why people need to be concerned about trusting the administrative state to be restrained in its use of power?