In the Senneville case, judges were ignoring existing mandatory minimums, even without a so-called safety valve. The Investigative Journalism Bureau analyzed 100 cases between 2020 and 2025, and they found that one in three sentences for possession of child sexual abuse material had not adhered to the previous sentencing minimum. Why, then, is the existing minimum, even prior to the Supreme Court weighing in, not keeping these offenders behind bars?
