Canada's Supreme Court hears one of its most important cases ever

The Supreme Court of Canada will spend most of this week debating the legality and constitutionality of Quebec's controversial Bill 21, also known as the "secularism law", which would ban religious symbols and clothing for public employees (including teachers) in positions of authority.

It is expected be one of the Supreme Court's longest ever cases, and is being called "one of the most consequential constitutional cases in the country's recent history", "the case to end all cases", and "the most important charter case in a generation", among other superlatives. That's largely because the "Act Respecting the Laicity of the State" essentially hangs on the Quebec government's invocation of Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the dreaded "notwithstanding clause". 

Originally intended to be used only very sparingly and in cases of absolute necessity, the clause has been invoked increasingly frequently in recent years, and even pre-emptively. It effectively allows governments to pass legislation which they know contravenes the fundamental rights and freedoms of Canadians that are supposedly protected by the Charter. In recent years, it has become a favourite tool of provincial governments, particular the right-wing populist governments we have been saddled with recently in Alberta, Ontario and Quebec.

The Supreme Court case this week should give some much-needed clarity on how and when such a nuclear option can reasonably be employed. Unfortunately, the Court will not be able to get rid of the ill-conceived clause completely, but let's hope that, by the end of the week, a precedent will have been set discouraging governments from over-using it.