Lawyers representing the Quebec government presented arguments in the Supreme Court today, asserting the province’s legitimacy in enacting its secularism legislation, Bill 21. Enforced in 2019, the law prohibits certain public sector employees from displaying religious symbols while on duty and includes a provision that supersedes the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
During the proceedings, Isabelle Brunet, counsel for the Quebec government, emphasized that the province is not obligated to justify its utilization of the notwithstanding clause. Brunet explained that this clause shields laws from legal examination, including declaratory judgments, where judges identify Charter violations without issuing specific remedies.
Despite Brunet’s stance, Justice Nicholas Kasirer challenged this perspective, highlighting that there is no constitutional provision preventing judges from issuing declaratory judgments on laws invoking the notwithstanding clause.
In the previous session, legal representatives for the opposing groups contended that Bill 21 excessively infringes upon Charter rights and is inherently unconstitutional.
