Premiers speak to the media during the 2025 summer meetings of Canada’s Premiers in Huntsville, Ont., in July, 2025.Nathan Denette/The Canadian Press
Canada’s judiciary has been under attack in 2025 by premiers on the left and the right. While their complaints differ, the one prevailing theme is that a large number of the country’s first ministers were frustrated when the judiciary didn’t produce the results they wanted.
So here is a gentle reminder for premiers in B.C., Alberta, Manitoba and Ontario: That is how it is supposed to work.
Canada’s justice system is not designed to be guided by popularity or political whims. Its independence is meant to provide the public confidence that judicial decisions are unbiased, separated from the political fray. That’s why “Lady Justice” is blindfolded.
Criticism of court judgments isn’t wrong in itself, and there is plenty to disagree with in a number of the cases that the premiers have raised. But making judges political targets undermines public confidence in our justice system. Read together, the public is being encouraged to believe that the courts are not acting with their best interests in mind.
There are other, better ways for a premier to respond to concerns without undermining the courts.
B.C.’s NDP Premier David Eby is unhappy with the result of two Aboriginal rights court cases that his government lost. He can appeal those cases, and he can rewrite provincial law. (He has said he will do both.)
But when he laments “dramatic, overreaching and unhelpful court decisions” that create “toxic” uncertainty for landowners and industry, he is inviting the public to blame the judiciary for uncertainty over land use – conveniently downplaying the role of his own government in those challenges.
The beef expressed by Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, leader of the United Conservative Party, is more charged and problematic. In a Dec. 6 radio broadcast, she suggested judges are politically tainted by the federal Liberal government that appointed them.
“The will of Albertans is not expressed by a single judge appointed by Justin Trudeau, and who never faces any kind of recall campaign, never faces any kind of election,” Ms. Smith said, after invoking the notwithstanding clause to implement legislation affecting trans and gender-diverse youth that are before the courts.
Would she prefer judges be elected based on their politics, rather than their legal ability? It would seem so: “Democracy is not when unelected judges unilaterally make decisions.”
Wab Kinew, Manitoba’s NDP premier, was chastised by the Manitoba Bar Association for expressing his disappointment in a judge’s decision to release a driver accused in a fatal crash on bail.
Judges need to think about how the public will feel about such a decision, he told the legislature on Oct. 7.
“I think we have to, with all respect that we have for the justice system, encourage our judges and justices of the peace to reflect on the role that their decisions will have when they are learned of by the public,” Mr. Kinew said.
As frustrating as it may be, judges are required to uphold Charter rights on access to bail. Premiers have lobbied Ottawa to change the Criminal Code on bail, which is a more appropriate avenue than directing judges to worry about popularity or optics.
If Mr. Kinew – or any other premier in Canada – wants to tackle bail issues, another useful avenue would be to better fund the criminal justice system to reduce the time it takes to get a case to trial. Pretrial detention is a bigger issue when it takes months to get to court.
This list wouldn’t be complete without the contributions of Ontario’s Progressive Conservative Premier Doug Ford.
Mr. Ford unleashed a tirade in April about “bleeding heart” judges who are, he said, guided by ideology. What set off his self-described rant was frustration over a court injunction that temporarily prevented his government from removing bike lanes along three major streets in Toronto.
His solution? “Let’s start electing judges, holding them accountable.”
Ontario’s top judges offered Mr. Ford a rare rebuke, noting that Canadians have the constitutional right to have their legal issues decided by an impartial judiciary. “Our justice system is founded on public confidence that decisions, whether popular or not, are fully heard and fairly made.”
Canada’s premiers have plenty of clout to take on the courts, through appeals, resources or the law. And they can do that without eroding confidence in the justice system.