Which step of the Oakes Test assesses whether the limiting law is legally justified?

The step of the Oakes Test that assesses whether the limiting law is legally justified is known as "Prescribed by Law." This component focuses on whether the law in question is sufficiently clear and can be understood as a legal norm. Essentially, it requires that the law is formally enacted and enforceable, ensuring it is not arbitrary or overly broad. It must be established that the law is aimed at achieving a legitimate goal, and thus it satisfies the initial criteria to be considered valid within the framework of section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

In this context, the Oakes Test is often applied to determine if a government's limitation on a Charter right is justifiable. The "Prescribed by Law" step is critical because if the law does not meet this criterion, any further analysis regarding its justification would be moot. This step ensures that the law has a tangible legal basis and is not merely an abstract concept.

The other options, while parts of the Oakes Test, pertain to different aspects of the analysis. For example, the "Proportionality Test" is concerned with evaluating the relationship between the law's objectives and its effects. "Minimum Impairment" examines whether the law constrains rights as little as possible