Teachers challenge Alberta law using notwithstanding clause to end strike

Teachers Challenge Alberta Law Using Notwithstanding Clause

Alberta teachers are taking Premier Danielle Smith’s government to court after it invoked the notwithstanding clause to end their strike, arguing that their Charter rights were overridden. Some members of the premier’s caucus have noted growing public outrage toward their actions.

Legal Action Initiated by Teachers

Jason Schilling, head of the Alberta Teachers' Association, announced on Thursday that the union has filed an application requesting a judge to immediately suspend the law, either in full or in part, until a full constitutional challenge is heard. The case is scheduled for November 20 at the Edmonton Court of King's Bench.

"In this action, teachers will ask the court to declare that the government's use of the notwithstanding clause was improper and invalid."

Schilling emphasized that the law infringes upon teachers' rights to freedom of association and expression. If allowed to stand unchallenged, he warned it could create a dangerous precedent affecting other workers and citizens.

"This legal action is not symbolic. We are standing up for the Charter itself, for the rule of law and for the limits that protect citizens from arbitrary government decisions."

Government’s Response

Justice Minister Mickey Amery affirmed the government’s commitment to defending the bill in court. He explained the use of the notwithstanding clause was to ensure students and parents have certainty that children could return and remain in classrooms.

"We invoked the notwithstanding clause because students and parents deserve full certainty that children could return to the classroom and stay in the classroom."

Amery also expressed confidence in the legality of their position, stating that the law surrounding the Charter is well established.

Summary

The Alberta Teachers' Association is legally challenging the government's use of the notwithstanding clause to halt their strike, asserting it violates fundamental Charter rights, while the government defends its action as necessary to maintain classroom stability.

Would you like the summary to be more detailed or concise?

more

HighRiverOnline HighRiverOnline — 2025-11-07

More News