Alberta Teachers Take Legal Stand Against Notwithstanding Clause

Alberta Teachers' Association president Jason Schilling speaks to the media as teachers strike in Edmonton on Monday, Oct. 6, 2025.

Alberta’s education sector is bracing for a high-stakes courtroom battle as the Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA) moves to challenge Premier Danielle Smith’s government over its controversial use of the notwithstanding clause to end a provincewide strike.

The dispute began in early October when thousands of teachers walked off the job, demanding improved working conditions and fairer bargaining terms. In response, Smith’s government invoked the notwithstanding clause—Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms—to fast-track back-to-work legislation. This clause allows governments to override certain Charter rights temporarily, shielding laws from constitutional challenges.

ATA president Jason Schilling announced that the union has filed a constitutional challenge, arguing that the government’s actions violated teachers’ fundamental rights to collective bargaining and freedom of association. The union is asking the Court of King’s Bench in Edmonton to suspend the law until a full hearing can determine its constitutionality.

The move has sparked widespread debate. Civil liberties groups have criticized the government’s reliance on the clause, warning it sets a dangerous precedent for limiting rights in labor disputes. Community leaders have also voiced concern, noting that undermining one group’s freedoms could ripple into broader restrictions on civil rights.

For Smith’s government, the decision is framed as necessary to protect students and families from prolonged disruption. Officials argue the notwithstanding clause is a legitimate tool available to governments when urgent action is required.

The case, scheduled to be heard later this month, could become a landmark in Canadian labor law. If successful, the teachers’ challenge may reshape how governments use the notwithstanding clause in future disputes, reinforcing the balance between government authority and Charter protections.