Quebec’s secularism law is heading to the Supreme Court: here’s how people are reacting

Canada’s highest court will have the last say on whether or not Quebec’s controversial secularism law, known as Bill 21, is constitutional.

The Supreme Court of Canada announced Thursday morning that it will hear the legal challenge launched by several groups, including the National Council of Canadian Muslims, the English Montreal School Board and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.

The high court only hears cases that it deems to be in the public interest and wrestled with the decision over Bill 21 for nearly nine months, which is longer than usual.

The law, officially titled “An Act Respecting the Laicity of the State,” was passed by the Quebec legislature in June 2019. It bans public servants in positions of authority — including teachers, judges, and police officers — from wearing religious symbols such as the hijab, turban or kippah while working.

Critics argued that the law is discriminatory and unfairly targets religious minorities, particularly Muslim women. The provincial government has defended the law, which it considers to be moderate and claims it is supported by the majority of Quebecers.

Here’s how people were reacting to the high court’s decision.

The CCLA

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association is one of the main interveners in the case and held a press conference in Ottawa on Thursday to react to the decision.

Harini Sivalingam, the CCLA’s director of the equality program, said it’s been a long road to get to the Supreme Court.

“It took five years to get there but the highest court in Canada will finally get to weigh in on this important legal challenge. For over five years, Bill 21 has been infringing on the dignity, rights and freedoms of individuals who work in and aspire to work in public service in Quebec,” Sivalingam said.

“Let us be clear. Bill 21 is a discriminatory law that violates the fundamental rights and freedoms of Quebecers. It negatively impacts individuals based on their religious beliefs. It is clear that Bill 21 has a disproportionate impact on specific religious minority groups, such as Muslim, Sikh, and Jewish communities. And it especially targets women. To make things worse, the passing of Bill 21, the government of Quebec used the notwithstanding clause to override important Charter protections, such as religious freedoms and equality rights. We cannot let the Quebec government do this without a fight.”

National Council of Canadian Muslims

Stephen Brown, CEO of the National Council of Canadian Muslims, said he welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case because the law’s purpose, he said, was “taking away the rights of select groups of unpopular minorities.”

The NCCM, along with the CCLA and Ichrak Nourel Hak — a teacher candidate — helped launch a constitutional challenge of the law in 2019.

Brown said it’s now up to eight judges of the Supreme Court to decide “if we get to continue to be a country where citizens have rights or do we move into being a country where citizens just so happen to have the permissions that our politicians decide to accord to us at any given point in time.”

On X, the group said “We will not stop fighting until Bill 21 is repealed.”

English Montreal School Board

Quebec’s largest English-language school board, the English Montreal School Board, is also challenging the law. Chairman Joe Ortona said Thursday’s decision signals the high court believes the law raises an issue of national importance.

The EMSB has argued the law is unconstitutional on two fronts. On one hand, Ortona said the law violates the board’s right to manage and control its school system — a right guaranteed under section 23 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It also argues that Bill 21 violates gender equality rights, particularly “Muslim women who tend to be the people that go into the teaching profession and tend to be the people that are the reason why the government enacted this bill specifically.”

According to Ortona, the secularism law also fuels the teacher shortage in Quebec.

“This [law] doesn’t resolve that issue. It actually amplifies the problem. It exacerbates it,” he said.

“It’s disappointing to see that we have to turn away teachers that we need based on a personal choice that they make to wear a religious symbol and who knows how many others never even bothered to apply because they know that they wouldn’t be allowed to be hired. It’s disappointing and hopefully we’ll get the results we’re looking for.”

Federal government now getting involved

The federal government has long said it wouldn’t get involved in the legal debate over Bill 21 unless the case makes its way to the Supreme Court. On Thursday on Parliament Hill, Justice Minister Arif Virani said “we’re going to be there” in the legal fight.

“We’re going to help defend the Charter that we helped create more than 40 years ago,” Virani told reporters.

“It’s very important to be there because now we’re having a case that’s going to impact all Canadians, not just the people in one province.

Virani also said the federal government has “significant concerns” about Premier François Legault’s preemptive use of the notwithstanding clause to shield Bill 21 from most legal challenges.

Once the hearings get started, he said the feds will argue how the rights of equality, religion, and freedom of expression should be interpreted “in the context of the usage of the notwithstanding clause.”

‘We’ll fight to the bitter end,' premier says

Proponents of the secularism law also have vowed to defend it before Canada’s highest court.

Legault said on X, “We’ll fight to the bitter end to defend our values and who we are.”

“Quebec has opted for secularism in the public sector, banning religious symbols and covered faces for public employees in positions of authority.”

The province’s justice minister, Simon Jolin-Barrette, said the path toward secularism was a choice that Quebec made after the “culmination of decades of debate” and that it was “vital for Quebec to be able to make its own choices.”

As expected, the justice minister took issue with Ottawa getting involved in the longstanding legal battle.

“Our autonomy is at stake - an autonomy that lies at the very heart of the federal pact. Intervention by the federal government in the Supreme Court would not only show disrespect, but could only be seen as an attack on the autonomy of the federated states,” he said on X.

“Secularism is a fundamental value for living together and a vector for social progress. It constitutes an individual right and protects the freedom and equality of all. It is through secularism that Quebecers of all backgrounds can come together to form a strong, modern and united nation.”

Mouvement laïque québécois

The Mouvement laïque québécois,a pro-Bill 21 group, is also an intervener in the case. The group’s lawyer, Guillaume Rousseau, said he was disappointed that the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal but was confident the law will be upheld.

“I’m pretty sure we’re going to win. And then I think that slowly but surely Bill 21 will be more and more accepted,” he told CTV News.

“And just like Bill 101 was very controversial at the end of the day ... until the 80s, and then slowly but surely became a part of the law of the land and has been more accepted.”

It’s too soon to say when the high court will begin holding hearings on the appeal. In 2024, the average length of time between the date leave to appeal was granted and the first hearing date was more than nine months.

With files from CTV News Montreal’s Kelly Greig