Bill 21: Supreme Court will hear legal challenge of Quebec secularism law
Posted January 23, 2025 4:00 am.
Last Updated January 23, 2025 4:41 pm.
The Supreme Court of Canada has agreed to hear a legal challenge of Quebec’s secularism law, known as Bill 21.
Today, the Supreme Court decided the following leave application. https://t.co/hErcuQppSQ pic.twitter.com/MDSlfpqkTj
— Supreme Court of Canada (@SCC_eng) January 23, 2025
The top court announced Thursday morning it has granted leave to appeal to several groups that oppose the law, which prohibits civil servants in positions of authority, including teachers and police officers, from wearing religious symbols on the job.
Bill 21 was passed in 2019 by the Quebec government, which pre-emptively invoked Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, known as the notwithstanding clause, to shield the legislation from court challenges over fundamental rights violations.
Amrit Kaur is one of those affected by Bill 21. She’s a teacher that wears her turban at all times and because of that she left Quebec and moved to B.C.
“The day that it was passed, was a day that I graduated. So in the morning, I was celebrating and when I came home, I heard the news,” said Kaur.
“When you grow up in a community, you want to contribute to it. I, unfortunately, couldn’t just because of the way I look and my faith.”
Fatima Ahmad understands. She’s a qualified teacher but because she wears a niqab, She hasn’t worked in a classroom. She teaches online, despite moving to Ontario — where the law no longer impacts her.
“It was very difficult to accept at the beginning because since I grew up in Montreal, I was looking forward to teach in Montreal,” said Ahmad.
“However, I really feel bad for the next generation that are coming. There’s many students that come to me and tell me: ‘I want to be a teacher, but I don’t know if I can do that anymore,’ because they wear the hijab.”
Opponents have fought the law ever since, but it has been largely upheld by lower courts. In April 2021, a Quebec Superior Court judge ruled Bill 21 was mostly legal, but exempted English-language school boards and struck down a ban on members of the provincial legislature wearing face coverings.
At the time, Justice Marc-André Blanchard criticized the government’s use of the notwithstanding clause, and found the law violates the rights of Muslim women and “dehumanizes” those affected. Still, he found the government’s approach was “legally unassailable in the current state of the law.”
Last February, the Quebec Court of Appeal upheld the secularism law and overturned the exemption for English schools in a victory for Quebec Premier François Legault.
Several groups sought leave to appeal that decision to the country’s top court, including the National Council for Canadian Muslims, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and the English Montreal School Board.
“Today we’re here to say that we are ready to vigorously defend the rights and freedoms of everyone who has been harmed and impacted by Bill 21,” said Harini Sivalingam, Director of the Equality Program of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
EMSB welcomes Supreme Court decision
The Chair of the English Montreal School Board, Joe Ortona, says he’s “happy” about the decision.
“It’s a first step, but an important one, because it means that there’s a constitutional question of national importance that it needs to be heard,” he said, in an interview.
Orton says the EMSB has felt that the law “went against their values, that it was unconstitutional, that it should never have been adopted.”
“We’ve maintained that based on the jurisprudence of Supreme Court cases in the past, that the restriction of hiring the teachers that we want based on merit and qualification without arbitrary restrictions, like the personal choice to wear religious symbol, infringes on our right to manage and control our public school system,” he said.
“It also places unfair restrictions and actually is an infringement on gender equality — this law infringes in a disproportionate way against women, specifically Muslim women, making it harder for them to be able to teach and get a job.”
The Quebec government has long argued the law is reasonable, and the province’s justice minister has said he intends to vigorously defend it against all challenges.
“Quebec has chosen secularism in the public sector,” Quebec Premier François Legault said in a statement on X. “We will fight to the end to defend our values and what we are.”
— Simon Jolin-Barrette (@SJB_CAQ) January 23, 2025
In a joint statement Quebec Justice Minister, Simon Jolin-Barrette, and the Minister responsible for Secularism, Jean-François Roberge said:
“We acknowledge the Supreme Court’s decision. One thing is certain: the Government of Quebec will fight to the end to defend the State Secularism Act. Quebecers have chosen secularism; a collective and legitimate choice that represents the culmination of decades of debate. It is essential, even vital, for Quebec to be able to make its own choices, choices that correspond to our history, our distinct social values and the aspirations of our nation.”
The ministers say the provincial government “will use the parliamentary sovereignty provision for as long as necessary to defend our societal choices.” They add that “secularism is a fundamental value for living together and a vector of social progress. It constitutes an individual right and protects the freedom and equality of all.”
The federal government plans to intervene in the case, though the Liberal party is now in the thick of a leadership race. “When it’s a matter of national importance and there’s a national conversation about interpreting Charter rights that will have an impact right around the country, we are going to be there,” Justice Minister Arif Virani told reporters Thursday. “And what we’re going to do when we’re there is we’re going to defend the Charter that we helped create over 40 years ago.”
Virani said he presumes that all candidates for the Liberal leadership “will continue our support as a party and government to protect the rights that are in the Canadian Constitution.”
But a possible spring election could lead to a change in government before the case is heard. The Conservatives have not said what approach they would take, though party leader Pierre Poilievre has said he opposes the law.
“It is the responsibility of any Canadian Prime Minister to do everything they can to stop, to prevent people from being able to take away unilaterally the rights and freedoms of Canadians,” said Stephen Brown, CEO of the National Council for Canadian Muslims (NCCM).
The provincial ministers say in their statement that “Quebec’s autonomy is at stake.”
They add: “An intervention by the federal government in the Supreme Court would not only be a lack of respect, but could not be considered anything other than an attack on the autonomy of the federated states.”
Brown, pointed out that other provinces, including Saskatchewan and Ontario, have pre-emptively invoked the notwithstanding clause since the Quebec government did so in 2019. “(Legault) let the genie of legal authoritarianism out of the bottle,” he told reporters in Ottawa. “What was supposed to be an extraordinary use of power has now become the norm.”
In a rare move, Supreme Court Justice Mahmud Jamal recused himself from the case last summer at the request of the attorney general of Quebec, who had cited his past connection to the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Jan. 23, 2025.
