I didn't say he was... no one did. It's called a hypothetical. Would you accept that as a legitimate reason for any government to change the boundaries? That's all I'm asking.
The rest of this post is "blah blah blah... avoiding the questions in my post".
I was pointing out context. And you are again confusing approving of someone's actions with not wanting some appointee to twist the law to prevent them from doing it.
As I have already stated, I don't approve of his sudden changes to Toronto's city council. But he has the legal right to do it. And I approve of an appointed judge twisting the law and democracy o suit himself far less.