# Weird decision of Quebec supreme court **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [April 20, 2021, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/weird-decision-of-quebec-supreme-court/940391 "2021-04-20T17:11:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2021, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/weird-decision-of-quebec-supreme-court/940391/1 "2021-04-20T17:11:53Z")
A year or two ago, Quebec passed a law that banned the wearing of religious “symbols” by people in the public service. That included teachers and day-care workers. There was a grandfather clause protecting people already working, but even these were forbidden to get promotions. Today, the Quebec supreme court basically upheld the law with two exceptions. First, it could not be applied to members elected to the Quebec assembly. Second, it could not be applied to teachers in English language schools. I have not heard, so far, any explanation for the latter exception. Perhaps we will know more when the actual decision is promulgated. ---
**Author:** ![hogarth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hogarth/32/1773_2.png) [@hogarth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hogarth)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2021, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/weird-decision-of-quebec-supreme-court/940391/2 "2021-04-20T18:30:17Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > Second, it could not be applied to teachers in English language schools. I have not heard, so far, any explanation for the latter exception. From the CBC: > In a ruling handed down Tuesday, Justice Marc-André Blanchard said the Quebec government has the right to restrict what religious symbols are worn by government employees, such as teachers, police officers and prosecutors. > > But he also said the law can’t be applied to English schools because it violates minority language education rights, protected under Section 23 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. > **[Quebec Superior Court upholds most of religious symbols ban, but...](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/bill-21-religious-symbols-ban-quebec-court-ruling-1.5993431)** > > The Quebec Superior Court has struck down some sections of the province's secularism law but also ruled that its most controversial provisions are constitutional. The government plans to appeal the decision, saying the exemption for anglophones will... ---
**Author:** ![Bookkeeper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bookkeeper/32/281_2.png) [@Bookkeeper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bookkeeper)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2021, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/weird-decision-of-quebec-supreme-court/940391/3 "2021-04-23T17:17:43Z")
I’m surprised it wasn’t struck down as contrary to the freedom of religion in Section 2 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Perhaps one of our local lawyers can weigh in. \*edit: Never mind - I see that the province has once again invoked the notwithstanding clause. Worst mistake of the 1982 Constitution. ---
**Author:** ![Dr\_Paprika](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr_paprika/32/3042_2.png) [@Dr\_Paprika](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr_Paprika)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2021, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/weird-decision-of-quebec-supreme-court/940391/4 "2021-04-24T00:20:08Z")
I’m not a huge fan of this decision, but apparently neither was the judge who passed it. Quebec has the right under the notwithstanding clause to conduct its own affairs. However, I do not see a lot of value in the decision. What has really been gained? The reverse of this question is easier to answer. ---
**Author:** ![MoodIndigo1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e8c25b/32.png) [@MoodIndigo1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MoodIndigo1)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2021, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/weird-decision-of-quebec-supreme-court/940391/5 "2021-04-25T00:45:16Z")
Just a nitpick about the heading of this thread. There is no such thing as a Quebec Supreme Court. It is a decision of the Superior Court (of which there are 2 in the province). The decision can be appealed, and the Court of Appeal of Quebec is the highest court in the province. ---
**Author:** ![Dr\_Paprika](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr_paprika/32/3042_2.png) [@Dr\_Paprika](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr_Paprika)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2021, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/weird-decision-of-quebec-supreme-court/940391/6 "2021-04-25T01:20:21Z")
Given the Quebec government disliking the exception for English schooling, the chance of an appeal is pretty high.