A surge of complaints targeting speech
Lawyers funded by the Justice Centre are representing Kari Simpson and her organization, Culture Guard, in response to a growing number of human rights complaints filed with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal. (Readers can view all complaints under “Explore Case Documents” at the bottom of this page.)
The complaints, brought by self-described transgender activist Jessica Simpson (formerly known as Jonathan Yaniv) (no relation to Kari Simpson), arise from online publications and commentary on cultural and public policy issues.
In total, at least 18 complaints have been filed so far, many advancing overlapping allegations based on gender identity or expression, sex, sexual orientation, and, in more recent filings, claims to the “MMIWG2SLGBTQQIPPSAA+” identity.
Allegations centre on language and public debate
Across the complaints, a consistent theme has emerged. The complainant alleges that public commentary questioning gender identity claims, using biological language, or referring to the complainant by male pronouns or a prior name amounts to discrimination. Several complaints also describe such expression as “existential denialism,” claiming it causes psychological harm and reputational damage. The filings are divided between complaints against Culture Guard and separate complaints against Ms. Simpson personally, each advancing similar arguments.
Prolific litigant
Jessica Simpson has previously been described by courts as a “prolific litigant” and has been involved in numerous unsuccessful human rights and civil proceedings, including cases dismissed for improper purposes. According to multiple news reports, Simpson has also faced criminal proceedings, including a conviction related to possession of a prohibited weapon and a separate assault conviction involving a journalist.
Free expression at the centre of the case
Kari Simpson said, “As a Canadian, I support the right to personal expression. But freedom of expression protects the right to express oneself, including dressing up like the opposite sex—it does not extend to compelling others to adopt or affirm that expression.” She added, “My rights, including freedom of expression, security of the person, and the ability to speak truthfully, must not be subordinated or cancelled due to another individual’s identity claims.”
Lawyers call for clear precedent
Constitutional lawyer Marty Moore said, “There is no Charter right to be free from criticism, or to be affirmed or approved in one’s claimed identity.” He added, “To the extent that human rights tribunals have indicated otherwise, a clear precedent needs to be set, upholding the fundamental freedoms of thought, opinion, belief, and expression against such an imagined right.”
Lawyers funded by the Justice Centre will defend Ms. Simpson’s right to participate in public discourse without being penalized for expressing her views, in what is shaping up to be a significant test of how human rights law interacts with the Charter’s protection of freedom of expression.