Alberta premier intends to ‘battle’ injunction on transgender health-care law in court

After an Alberta judge granted a temporary injunction blocking a provincial law that would ban doctors from providing gender-affirming care to youth, Premier Danielle Smith announced her intention to challenge the decision in court. The ruling by Justice Allison Kuntz of the Alberta Court of King’s Bench on Bill 26 was met with opposition from Smith, who expressed her belief that the law would not cause irreparable harm as suggested by the court.

“We want to fight this out in court, and we believe we have a strong case to do so,” Smith stated on her radio program, Your Province, Your Premier. However, Eric Adams, a law professor at the University of Alberta, cautioned that while the injunction does not guarantee a victory in a constitutional case, it does signify that there will be robust legal arguments against the legislation presented in court.

Bennett Jensen, legal director of 2SLGBTQ+ advocacy group Egale Canada and co-counsel in the case against the province, expressed relief at the temporary halt of the law, citing concerns over the potential harm it could cause to young people seeking gender-affirming care.

In response to the government’s decision to challenge the injunction, Jensen emphasized the importance of considering the evidence presented in court and the potential impact on vulnerable youth. He urged a reconsideration of the law in light of the judicial findings.

While Premier Smith indicated that the province would pursue legal avenues to challenge the injunction, she also mentioned the notwithstanding clause as a possible “last resort.” The clause, if invoked, would override certain sections of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to allow the law to proceed.

Adams explained that the notwithstanding clause could only be implemented when the provincial legislature reconvenes in October, at the earliest. He noted that the clause has been used sparingly in Alberta’s history, with previous attempts drawing public backlash.

The legal battle over Bill 26 is expected to be complex, with serious constitutional issues at stake. Adams suggested that the government may need to consider alternative strategies if the litigation does not progress in their favor.

Overall, the fight over Bill 26 underscores the ongoing debate surrounding gender-affirming care for youth and the balance between government legislation and individual rights. As the case unfolds in court, the ultimate outcome remains uncertain, with significant implications for the LGBTQ+ community in Alberta and beyond.