OTTAWA—British Columbia aboriginal leader Jody Wilson-Raybould is a newcomer to government but not to the law, and as Justin Trudeau’s newly named justice minister she faces several of the country’s biggest legal challenges ever.

Drafting an assisted suicide law to conform to a Supreme Court of Canada ruling last February immediately falls to Wilson-Raybould, a lawyer, former provincial Crown prosecutor and treaty commission adviser.

Her other big agenda items include Trudeau’s pledge to legalize marijuana, and whether to defend a number of Conservative government laws and policies that face constitutional or legal challenges in the courts. Those include:

The niqab ban at citizenship ceremonies.

The law that allows terrorists holding dual citizenship to be stripped of their Canadian passport.

Mandatory minimum sentences for people convicted of growing small amounts of marijuana

Arbitrary curbs on sick leave provisions for public servants.

Amending the national security scheme under Bill C-51 to meet the Liberal campaign pledge of more parliamentary oversight and ensuring CSIS respects Charter rights.

Wilson-Raybould will doubtless be a key hand on legal issues involving aboriginal communities as well.

“I’m immensely proud to be an aboriginal person in this country and I’m equally proud to be a Canadian,” she said. “And the diversity that is reflected around the cabinet table, in the House of Commons is incredibly empowering.”

The controversy surrounding assisted suicide will test her skills perhaps more than any other file. It is an emotional issue that crosses all cultural, political and religious lines.

Last winter, the high court declared unconstitutional the Criminal Code’s ban on assisting gravely ill people who wish to end their lives. It gave lawmakers a year to redraft legislation, and the clock is running out.

In a 9-0 judgment, the court declared the Criminal Code’s absolute ban on assisted suicide goes too far. Its attempt to protect the lives of “vulnerable people” also prevents competent, consenting adults suffering “grievous and irremediable medical conditions” from making core decisions about how they live and die, and so breaches three of the most basic rights: to life, liberty and security of the person, all enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and is not justified in a free democratic society, the court found.