d01tg0d0wn
Active Member
Alberta judge grants injunction blocking a transgender health-care bill
An Alberta judge has put on hold a provincial law that bans doctors from providing gender-affirming care to youth.
www.ctvnews.ca
An Alberta judge has put on hold a provincial law that bans doctors from providing gender-affirming care to youth.
Justice Allison Kuntz, in a written judgment Friday, said the law raises serious issues that need to be hashed out in court, and issued a temporary injunction against the law before it fully came into effect.
Kuntz wrote that a temporary stop is needed to prevent what she calls “irreparable harm” coming to young patients while the issue is debated.
“The evidence shows that singling out health care for gender diverse youth and making it subject to government control will cause irreparable harm to gender diverse youth by reinforcing the discrimination and prejudice that they are already subjected to,” Kuntz wrote in the judgment.
The law, passed late last year but not fully in effect, would have prevented doctors from providing treatment such as puberty blockers and hormone therapy to those under 16.
Kuntz wrote that denying access to this care not only risks causing youth emotional harm but also exposes them to permanent physical changes that don’t match their gender identity.
“Intentionally or not, the ban will signal that there is something wrong with or suspect about having a gender identity that is different than the sex you were assigned at birth,” she wrote.
“Gender diverse youth will bear the entire burden of that speculation.”
LGBTQ+ advocacy groups Egale Canada and the Skipping Stone Foundation took the case to court, and in a statement Egale said the decision was a “historic win.”
Also listed as applicants in the case are five transgender youth who will be directly affected.
Egale’s legal director Bennett Jensen said Friday that the decision was a “huge relief” for the youth involved.
“(The legislation) does not solve any real issues in the medical system,” Jensen said in an interview.
“It simply creates them and targets an already very vulnerable, small group of young people with further discrimination, and that’s what the judge found.”
Premier Danielle Smith has said she believes the legislation is needed to protect young people from making permanent, life-altering decisions.
Smith has said it’s about preserving that adult choice, and that making “permanent and irreversible decisions” about one’s biological sex while still a child can limit that.
Heather Jenkins, press secretary to Alberta Justice Minister Mickey Amery, provided a statement on Friday evening:
“Bill 26, the Health Statutes Amendment Act, 2024 (No 2), was passed to protect children and youth when making life-altering and potentially irreversible adult decisions about their bodies,” Jenkins said.
“Alberta’s government will continue to vigorously defend our position in court and is considering all options with respect to the court’s decision.”
Opposition NDP Leader Naheed Nenshi said in a statement that his party was pleased to see the court decision, calling it a “great day for young Albertans who simply want to live authentically and safely.”
“The court has determined what we already knew, that this ban could cause irreparable harm to gender diverse young Albertans,” Nenshi said.
“This was never about doing the right thing: it was always about demonizing vulnerable kids to boost Danielle Smith’s political fortunes.”
Also lauding the decision Friday was Senator Kris Wells, the former Canada Research Chair for the Public Understanding of Sexual and Gender Minority Youth.
“This isn’t just a win for trans youth, it is a win for Canada’s health-care system,” Wells wrote on social media.
“No politician should be dictating or restricting your access to evidence-based medical care.”
Egale and the Skipping Stone Foundation aren’t the only groups challenging the bill.
Last month, the Canadian Medical Association and three Alberta-based doctors launched a legal case challenging the constitutionality of the bill, arguing it violates their Charter right to freedom of conscience.
Alberta’s other two pieces of transgender legislation — banning transgender women from competing in women’s sports and preventing youth under 16 from changing their name or pronouns in the school system without parental consent — have yet to be challenged in court.
The education bill also requires parents to opt in for their children to receive lessons in school on sexuality, sexual orientation and gender identity.
------------------------------------------------------------
This maneuver looks familiar. Lets see what AI says
AI Overview
In Canada, the judiciary does not "trump" the province in a straightforward sense. While the judiciary interprets and applies laws, including those enacted by provincial legislatures, it operates within a framework of constitutional law where both the federal and provincial governments have defined spheres of authority. The judiciary's role is to ensure that laws, whether federal or provincial, are consistent with the Canadian Constitution. If a law is deemed unconstitutional, the judiciary can invalidate it, but this power is not an inherent "trump" card over the province, but rather a mechanism to uphold the rule of law.
Here's a more detailed explanation:
- Constitutional Framework:
Canada's Constitution divides powers between the federal and provincial governments. The federal government has jurisdiction over certain areas (like criminal law), while provinces have jurisdiction over others (like property and civil rights within the province).
- Judicial Review:
The judiciary's role is to interpret the Constitution and ensure that all levels of government act within their constitutional boundaries.
- Interpreting Laws:
When a law is challenged in court, the judiciary interprets the law and determines its constitutionality. If a law is found to be inconsistent with the Constitution, the judiciary can declare it invalid.
- Not a Superseding Power:
The judiciary's power to invalidate laws is not a general power to "trump" the province. It's a specific power to ensure laws are consistent with the Constitution. Provincial legislatures can still pass laws, but those laws must be constitutional.
- Example:
If a province passes a law that infringes on a right protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the judiciary can strike down that law. This action is based on the judiciary's role as interpreter of the Constitution, not on a general power to overrule provincial decisions.
- Judicial Independence:
Canada's Constitution ensures judicial independence, meaning judges are free from political influence when making decisions, including those involving the constitutionality of laws.
Upvote
10
