Decision expected soon in case that challenges Alberta’s “safe spaces” law

Share this:

Dr. Frances Widdowson (Courtesy of Dr. Widdowson)
Dr. Frances Widdowson (Courtesy of Dr. Widdowson)

Decision expected soon in case that challenges Alberta’s “safe spaces” law

Dr. Frances Widdowson (Courtesy of Dr. Widdowson)
Dr. Frances Widdowson (Courtesy of Dr. Widdowson)

Share this:

CALGARY, AB: The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announces that the Alberta Court of Appeal will soon release its decision in a case challenging whether speaking events can be censored on the basis of potential “psychological harm” to an audience, infringing Charter-protected freedoms of expression (section 2(b) and peaceful assembly (section 2(c).

This case stems from the University of Lethbridge’s January 30, 2023, decision to cancel a speaking event featuring Dr. Frances Widdowson, who has frequently challenged established narratives on Indigenous matters.

In written argument filed in 2024 the University claimed it cancelled the event, in part, because it had obligations under Alberta’s Occupational Health and Safety Act to ensure a workplace free of “harassment” and free of hazards to “psychological and social wellbeing.”

Lawyers argue that these provisions (which might be described as a “safe spaces” law) compel employers to censor lawful expression under threat of fines or imprisonment.

Constitutional lawyer Glenn Blackett said, “Safe spaces provisions are a serious threat to Charter freedoms. Employers who don’t censor ‘unsafe’ speech are liable to be fined or even jailed. This isn’t just the government censoring speech, it is the government requiring citizens to censor one another.”

Given the University’s defence, lawyers asked the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta to allow an amendment to the lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of the “safe spaces” laws. However, the Court denied the request. According to the Court’s apparent reasoning because the safe spaces law is worded vaguely and generally, it is immune from constitutional challenge.

Mr. Blackett says, “I think the Court got things backwards. If legislation infringes Charter rights in a vague or general way, infringements become impossible to justify – they don’t become Constitution-proof.”

Widdowson and co-litigant Jonah Pickle appealed the ruling to the Alberta Court of Appeal, which heard argument on Monday. A decision from the Court of Appeal is expected soon.

Share this:

EXCLUSIVE: Jeffrey Evely disposing of ticket after constitutional win (Courtesy of Jeffrey Evely)

Crown withdraws $28,872.50 ticket issued under unconstitutional Nova Scotia “woods ban”

HALIFAX, NS: The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announces that the Crown has withdrawn the ticket issued to Jeffrey...
Frances Widdowson (Courtesy of Wyatt Claypool)

University of Victoria trespass case against Dr. Frances Widdowson stayed

VICTORIA, BC: The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announces that the trespass prosecution against Canadian academic Dr. Frances Widdowson...
Evan Blackman and his son at a hockey game (Courtesy Evan Blackman)

Father whose bank accounts were frozen under Emergencies Act appeals Freedom Convoy conviction

OTTAWA, ON: The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announces that lawyers funded by the Justice Centre will appear before...

Explore Related News

EXCLUSIVE: Jeffrey Evely disposing of ticket after constitutional win (Courtesy of Jeffrey Evely)
Read More
Frances Widdowson (Courtesy of Wyatt Claypool)
Read More
Evan Blackman and his son at a hockey game (Courtesy Evan Blackman)
Read More
EXCLUSIVE: Jeffrey Evely disposing of ticket after constitutional win (Courtesy of Jeffrey Evely)
Frances Widdowson (Courtesy of Wyatt Claypool)
Evan Blackman and his son at a hockey game (Courtesy Evan Blackman)
Canadian Identity and Culture Minister Marc Miller during a June 10 press conference on Bill C-34 (Photo credit: THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld)