Sask. lawyers call out premier for 'judicial overreach' comments

The Saskatchewan Trial Lawyers’ Association (STLA) is calling out the premier for his comments in the wake of a court injunction over a controversial government policy.

In September, a Regina judge issued an injunction against a new Ministry of Education policy requiring students under 16-years-old to seek parental consent before changing their pronouns or preferred first names in a school setting. The injunction put a pause on the policy until the court rules on a legal challenge mounted by the University of Regina Pride Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity (UR Pride).

In a statement sent to media, Premier Scott Moe vowed to recall the legislature early to rush legislation that would enshrine the policy in law, invoking the notwithstanding clause to skirt claims that it breaches Charter rights.

"Our government is extremely dismayed by the judicial overreach of the court," Moe said.

The STLA, which comprises over 300 lawyers across the province, says his statement was concerning.

“While we respect the premier and our government, we believe such remarks to be premature with the potential to erode public trust in our judiciary,” the STLA said in a news release on Friday.

“The pause directed by the court is particularly crucial given the Charter arguments raised and the broader concern for our community, particularly our younger population.”

The judiciary plays a vital role in balancing the power of the legislative branch, and mutual respect between those institutions is “paramount for the effective functioning of our democracy,” STLA said.

“The legislature devises and implements policies reflecting the best interests of our populace, while the judiciary interprets these policies, ensuring they align with established legal frameworks and societal values,” the news release said.

In his decision to grant the injunction, Justice Michael Megaw noted a clear lack of planning and consultation on the policy.

He dismissed many of the Saskatchewan government's arguments against the injunction, including a claim that without the policy a six-year-old child starting elementary school could ask to be called by a different name or pronoun, or be identified by a different gender.

"I find this argument lacks persuasiveness and to be without foundation or basis on the materials that are before the court on this application. There is no indication in the materials that any students as young as six years old are looking to engage in this discussion," Megaw said.

"Furthermore, there is no indication that teachers or any other educational professionals either have been asked, or will be asked, to engage in this discussion."

Referencing the testimony of expert witnesses, Megaw said the policy would likely harm children.

"On the whole of the evidence, I am satisfied that those individuals affected by this policy, youth under the age of 16 who are unable to have their name, pronouns, gender diversity, or gender identity, observed in the school will suffer irreparable harm.”

The STLA calls on the Saskatchewan Party not to evade the scrutiny of the court.

“We urge the Government of Saskatchewan to respect the role of the judiciary and to allow the court to perform its constitutional role of judicial review, free from unnecessary remarks that may be taken as inflammatory.”

-With files from Josh Lynn