Article content continued

They are seeking immediate judicial stays on the sections of the law that prohibit state employees from wearing religious symbols as well as on the article that requires people to give or receive state services with their faces uncovered.

A judge might eventually rule that Bill 21 is constitutional, McKenzie said. But until then, she asked Yergeau to issue the stay so religious minorities can continue seeking employment.

Bill 21 invokes the notwithstanding clause of the Canadian Constitution, which prevents citizens from challenging the law for violating fundamental rights and freedoms protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

McKenzie and Olga Redko, another lawyer arguing the case, are challenging Bill 21 on three grounds rooted outside the charter.

Redko said Bill 21 is unconstitutional because it attempts to legislate the relationship between religion and the state, which she argued is the sole purview of the federal government.

Second, she said Bill 21 is impermissibly vague because it fails to clearly identify how it would be applied and enforced.

Lastly, Redko argued the law violates the structure of the federal system by prohibiting people from participating in public institutions. The protection of minority rights has been built into the structure of Canadian Confederation, she said.

People can’t leave their religion at the door, Redko said. Therefore religious people are unable to fully participate in Quebec public life.

“When this law says ‘no religious symbols’ what it’s really saying is ‘no religious people,’ McKenzie said.

Lawyers representing Quebec’s attorney general are expected to begin their arguments in favour of the law this afternoon.