The Supreme Court of Canada is hearing a case about the use of the Notwithstanding Clause in relation to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In this episode, Wyatt Claypool talks about the implications of the Supreme Court hearing the case and what it could mean for Canada. He also talks about Alberta's anti-transgender laws and how they may be a violation of the Charter.
00:00:00.000Hey guys, Wyatt Claypool here. We have a big issue going on right now in Canada that may have the power to unite Alberta and Quebec, and that is the Mark Carney Liberal government trying to go after provinces' use of the Notwithstanding Clause Section 33 of the Charter.
00:00:21.160This effectively allows for provinces to say, I don't really care that a court is saying that we're somehow violating the Charter in another way. We are going to have this law basically go forward anyways, and we'll have to renew it every four years because it's technically violative in some way.
00:00:39.340Section 33 of the Charter has been very useful in Canada considering how liberal the judges across the country are.
00:00:48.160So oftentimes, you will pass a law that's not actually violating the Charter, but a court will say it is, and so then you have to invoke the Notwithstanding Clause in order to just have the law still be implemented anyways.
00:01:01.420And so now, the Liberal government is going after the use of Section 33 and trying to create more rules around whether or not you can use it or not, and now we have Liberals also coping really hard in the aftermath as Conservatives point out that they are doing exactly what they're trying to do.
00:01:21.380But before we get into it today, guys, I just want to remind you, if you like the show, make sure to leave a like on this video, subscribe to the channel if you are not yet a subscriber, and leave a comment on what you think about all this.
00:01:34.640Now, here is the current Canadian Attorney General, somehow it is Sean Frazier, and he put out this press release the other day on what he and his office are doing in front of the Supreme Court.
00:01:47.940Sean Frazier says, please see my statement on Canada's intervention before the Supreme Court.
00:01:55.280And it says, today, the Honorable Sean Frazier, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, issued the following statement regarding Canada's intervention before the Supreme Court of Canada.
00:02:07.100Quote, as Attorney General of Canada, I have filed a factum with the Supreme Court of Canada,
00:02:13.280outlining Canada's position on constitutional issues raised by the use of the Notwithstanding Clause.
00:02:20.220The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a pillar of our democracy and a reflection of our shared values.
00:02:26.780It guarantees fundamental freedoms, including freedom of thought, belief, expression, religion, and association.
00:02:32.360Except when the Liberals don't like your religion, your association, or your beliefs.
00:02:36.900Quote, it also guarantees equality before the law and the right to life, liberty, and the security of the person.
00:02:44.860The Charter protects these rights for everyone in Canada, and they are at the heart of our democratic society.
00:02:52.700This case is about more than the immediate issues before the court.
00:02:56.800The Supreme Court's decision will shape how both federal and provincial governments may use Notwithstanding Clause for years to come.
00:03:03.800As the court considers this case, Canadians can count on the government of Canada to defend their constitution,
00:03:10.640respect their rights and freedoms, and stand up for the Charter that protects them.
00:03:15.660Now, basically what they're trying to do is, in some case in front of the Supreme Court,
00:03:21.220they're saying, okay, the Supreme Court may rule that something is against the Charter,
00:03:26.260but that, like, the province is still going to use the Notwithstanding Clause in order to just get around it.
00:03:34.100But now the Supreme Court must say whether or not the way that you implement the Notwithstanding Clause
00:03:40.060can be regulated by the court based on arbitrary things like,
00:03:44.520oh, you knew something was already going to be violated of the Charter,
00:03:48.420ergo, you can't use the Notwithstanding Clause.
00:03:50.760You can only use it if something happens to violate the Charter, but you just didn't know it going into it.
00:03:57.940And now you have all these people posting extremely stupid stuff like this that involves the Notwithstanding Clause.
00:04:06.120We have Dwayne Bratt here, a policy professor at the University of Calgary,
00:04:11.060reacting to a story where the Alberta government is passing three laws about transgender people.
00:04:18.960And the article headline from the CBC says,
00:04:22.380Alberta looks to use Notwithstanding Clause on its three transgender laws.
00:04:27.600And Dwayne Bratt says, the Alberta government knows that this is anti-trans legislation,
00:04:32.780their anti-trans legislation that violates the Charter.
00:04:36.440That is why it is preparing to use the Notwithstanding Clause.
00:04:40.420It's like, well, no, it's not violative.
00:04:42.960It's that there's liberal judges all over courts in Canada who think that if you prevent biological men from competing in women's sports,
00:04:53.800that if you prevent children from transitioning, from medically transitioning,
00:04:59.640that that is somehow a charter violation.
00:05:02.060It really shouldn't be considered a charter violation at all.
00:05:05.080And the Alberta government knows the courts will attempt to try and block legislation like this.
00:05:11.220So it's pre-preparing the fact that it's going to use the Notwithstanding Clause if they try and block it.
00:05:17.580We have here the Alberta Premier Danielle Smith reacting to what Sean Frazier had said,