A family-friendly drag show sparked debate in Leduc
In May 2024, a Leduc dance studio hosted and promoted a drag show advertised as “family-friendly.” The event prompted discussion among local residents about whether drag performances were appropriate for children.
Karen Richert, a Leduc business owner and former municipal candidate, participated in that discussion through “Voice of Leduc,” a local Facebook group that she previously administered. The group provided a forum for residents to discuss community issues and local governance.
Ms. Richert and other residents used the group to express concerns about the drag show and its promotion to families and children.
Online criticism led to a human rights complaint
In June 2025, the dance studio owner filed a complaint against Ms. Richert with the Alberta Human Rights Commission under the Alberta Human Rights Act. The complaint alleged that Ms. Richert’s online criticism of the drag show constituted discriminatory expression.
The complaint was filed more than one year after the events in question. The Alberta Human Rights Act imposed a one-year deadline for filing complaints, which could not be extended or waived.
In autumn 2025, the Commission rejected the complaint because it had been filed after the statutory deadline. The Commission subsequently upheld that decision upon reconsideration.
In January 2026, however, the Commission reversed course and informed Ms. Richert that it would proceed with the complaint, despite the missed deadline and its earlier decisions.
Lawyers argued that opinions were protected from punishment
Lawyers funded by the Justice Centre represented Ms. Richert in responding to the complaint.
The complaint relied on a provision of the Alberta Human Rights Act restricting certain forms of expression. The same provision also protected the free expression of opinion on any subject. Alberta courts, including in Lund v Boissoin, had recognized this protection for opinions, including opinions that others considered objectionable.
Lawyers argued that Ms. Richert’s comments constituted protected expressions of opinion and should not have been subject to investigation or punishment by the Commission.
“People are allowed to have an opinion on drag shows for children, even if it’s a negative one, and people are allowed to express that opinion, whether in person, in print or online,” said constitutional lawyer Phil Dunlop, part of the legal team representing Ms. Richert. “Alberta law is clear that the expression of opinion on any topic is not subject to review or to punishment by a human rights tribunal in this province,” he added.
Ms. Richert expressed concern about what the complaint meant for freedom of expression more broadly.
“Freedom of expression includes the right to hear: to listen to what others in our community value and believe, without fear,” she said. “When the institutions meant to protect our rights become oppressive, and speech is chilled, whether by overreach, pressure, or fear, the loss of a free and democratic society begins.”
The complaint remained before the Commission
Lawyers secured an extension and filed a formal response to the complaint by the April 30, 2026, deadline.
As of August 2026, the complaint remained before the Alberta Human Rights Commission. The Commission could dismiss the complaint, pursue mediation, or advance the matter to a hearing.