CALGARY—Another legal attempt to suspend provincial legislation protecting gay-straight alliances has been blocked by Alberta’s highest court.

The clubs are voluntary organizations for LGBTQ students and their allies. While GSAs have been accepted in Alberta schools since 2015, Bill 24 — introduced in 2017 — further protects them. It requires school administrators to accept a GSA if students ask for one and forbids staff from outing members to their parents.

Roughly two dozen faith-based schools, parents, and advocacy groups represented by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms launched an injunction in April 2018 to suspend Bill 24, pending a constitutional review of the law.

The group of appellants described GSAs as “ideological sexual clubs” and argued keeping parents out of the loop on their children’s participation in the clubs violated their charter rights. They also said adhering to Bill 24 would impinge on their religious beliefs. A judge dismissed the injunction request last June, saying the benefits GSAs provide to LGBTQ youth outweigh any potential harms.

In their 27-page decision, Justice Frederica Schutz and Justice Dawn Pentelechuk wrote that the appellants failed to show errors they claimed were made by the chambers judge — the original judge who dismissed the injunction — would have tainted the court’s findings.

These included the fact sexually explicit materials were “at one point” linked through the Alberta GSA Network, but that “there was no evidence” of the government promoting sexually explicit material. It also described the affidavits of parents who claimed GSAs encouraged gender transition or provided medical advice as “largely hearsay.”

Ultimately, the justices ruled even a temporary exception would not outweigh the presumed good of Bill 24 in all Alberta schools. Attendance in a GSA is not mandatory, nor does it prevent a student from discussing their attendance with their parents if they wish.

“In the meantime, the legislation puts the choice of disclosure of a child’s attendance at a voluntary GSA in the child’s hands, not in the control of their parents, their school or its school board,” Schutz and Pentelechuk wrote. “The public good presumed in protecting the safety and privacy interests of these individual children, as well as promoting an inclusive school environment generally, is extremely high.”

Justice J.D. Bruce McDonald, who dissented, said the appellants had reasonable concerns about losing their provincial funding and accreditation if they did not adhere to Bill 24’s provisions, pointing to an order issued by then-education minister David Eggen three weeks before the appeals were to be argued.

“I am prepared to find that there will be irreparable harm done to the schools in question if they are forced to comply with the legislation that impinges their religious beliefs in order to keep open pending a determination of its constitutionality,” he wrote.

He said he would have allowed for a limited injunction, which would only apply to the schools in question.

However, regardless of the ongoing legal battle, the incoming United Conservative government’s educational reforms include removing Bill 24. Premier-designate Jason Kenney told reporters during the provincial election campaign that he has no plans to repeal the legislation. But his party’s education platform includes the replacement of the School Act — which contains Bill 24 — with the unproclaimed Education Act.

The latter piece of legislation includes language on GSAs, but does not require school administrators to approve them. It also has no specific prohibitions around outing GSA participants to their parents.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Since the ruling was 2-1, those fighting for an injunction on Bill 24 are still able to ask for leave to pursue their case at the Supreme Court.

With files from The Canadian Press

Read more about: