Supreme Court clears path for youth-led climate case against Ford government
A climate lawsuit brought by seven young activists will proceed in Ontario after Canada's Supreme Court declined to hear the Ford government's appeal.
The decision allows the case to proceed in Ontario's Superior Court for a full hearing that could redefine governments' legal obligations to combat climate change under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The lawsuit, filed in 2019, challenges the Ford government's rollback of its 2030 emissions target — from a 37 per cent reduction below 1990 levels to just 30 per cent below 2005 levels. This weaker policy permits an estimated 200 million additional tonnes of carbon pollution by 2030 — equivalent to the annual emissions of 47 million gas-powered cars.
Fraser Thomson, an Ecojustic lawyer representing the youth, called the ruling 'a landmark day in the fight for climate justice.'
He said the government rollback violates Charter rights by exposing young people to escalating risks from extreme weather, long-term health impacts and environmental injustice. The plaintiffs are asking the court to order Ontario to adopt science-based targets aligned with Canada's international commitments under the Paris Agreement.
'We are in a climate emergency that threatens our homes, health, way of life and our futures. Governments, like Ontario, have repeatedly shown that they are unwilling to take this threat seriously — their failure puts us all at risk,' Thomson said. "That is why our seven youth clients have turned to the court. When governments violate Charter protected rights on such a massive scale, it's not only the role of courts to hold them accountable — it's their duty.'
The case was initially dismissed in 2023 but revived last year by Ontario's Court of Appeal, which ruled the constitutional claims deserved a full hearing.
The decision allows the case to proceed in Ontario's Superior Court for a full hearing that could redefine governments' legal obligations to combat climate change under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Youth applicant Sophia Mathur, now 18, said she's hopeful the case will lead to a decisive outcome.
'I am fighting for my future, and for the future of every young person in Canada,' Mathur said. 'I was only 12 years old when we took Ontario to court for the first time, but I was already witnessing the ways climate change was impacting my community, our way of life and my dreams for the future. We are ready to be back in court and feel hopeful that we will get the fulsome resolution and decisive victory we have spent the last six years fighting for.'
Thomson noted that this is the first time a Charter challenge over a government's climate target has reached the full trial stage. He said the outcome could clarify whether Canadian governments have a constitutional obligation to protect citizens — especially youth — from the impacts of climate change.
A spokesperson for the Ontario Attorney General said the Supreme Court's decision does not mean the province's climate plan has been ruled unconstitutional, adding it would be inappropriate to comment further on a matter before the court.
Ontario Greens Leader Mike Schreiner said the Supreme Court's decision underscores why young people are taking action.
'I absolutely understand why young people are furious that the Ford government has failed to address the climate crisis, and is, in fact, making it worse,' Schreiner said.
He said the government is falling short on climate preparedness, citing the high costs imposed on the Greater Toronto Area by last summer's floods and recent storms that left some Ontarians without power for more than a week. Schreiner also praised young people for standing up for a livable future and pushing for greater accountability on the climate crisis.
The case is part of a growing global trend in climate litigation. According to the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, more than 2,600 climate-related lawsuits have been filed worldwide — most since the 2015 Paris Agreement.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Toronto Star
2 hours ago
- Toronto Star
Canada condemns Iran's attack on Israel, calls for de-escalation: Anand
OTTAWA - The Canadian government is condemning an Iranian attack on Israel after a barrage of long-range missiles was launched at Tel Aviv in retaliation for an Israeli strike in Iran. Israel attacked Iranian missile and nuclear sites Friday and Iran warned of 'severe punishment' before launching its missiles in response.
Montreal Gazette
4 hours ago
- Montreal Gazette
Letters: As feds seek unity, Quebec digs heels on divisive tuition hikes
In today's challenging political and economic climate, our newly elected federal government is making a commendable effort to unite Canadians by breaking down provincial barriers and promoting national prosperity. Unfortunately, the latest stance from the Coalition Avenir Québec government — sticking to its contentious tuition hikes for out-of-province students despite a court order — runs counter to this vision. Premier François Legault's claims that the French language is being eroded appear unfounded and risk deepening divisions at a time when unity is more critical than ever. Canada is facing serious external pressures, particularly from our southern neighbour. Now is the time to set aside narrow political interests and focus on strengthening and preserving our country — together. Robert Tellier, Westmount Bill 40 belongs in Supreme Court Re: ' On death, taxes and the fate of minority rights ' (Robert Libman, June 7) Columnist Robert Libman asserts that the Supreme Court should decline to hear the Quebec government's appeal concerning education reform Bill 40. He highlights that two Quebec courts have unanimously ruled on what appears to be a straightforward matter. I respectfully disagree, as this issue extends beyond the jurisdiction of Quebec's interests. In Quebec, our public school system has two governance systems — one for the English-speaking community and the other for the French-speaking community. No other province in Canada has a system of school governance where language determines the rules, resulting in different standards for democracy, accountability and transparency. I feel this situation is unacceptable in any context. The issue requires additional scrutiny. Chris Eustace, Pierrefonds Asylum seekers face more hurdles Re: ' Group holds protest against proposed federal security bill ' (The Gazette, June 10) and ' Critic calls out border security bill provision ' (NP Montreal, June 6) It's perhaps surprising that one of the first pieces of legislation proposed by the Mark Carney government, Bill C-2, will make it far more difficult for refugees to apply for asylum in Canada. Under the bill's provisions, people who have been in Canada for more than a year will not be permitted to go through the refugee determination process. Those who cross by land from the U.S., with some exceptions, will not be permitted to stay, and the post-14-day period through which they can currently apply will be nullified. Bill C-2 would also give the government the power to cancel anyone's pre-citizenship or residency status. It's as though huge 'refugees need not apply' banners were placed at the Canadian border — a throwback to the Mackenzie King era. Shloime Perel, Côte-St-Luc Finding right fit for Bay building Re: ' 'A Trophy Asset' ' (The Gazette, June 10) The recent closing of Hudson's Bay stores has raised the question of the future vocation for the flagship store in downtown Montreal. My preference would be to repurpose it as another department store, at least for its older part fronting Ste-Catherine St. W., to maintain the street's character as a major commercial artery of Montreal. I suggest inviting Galeries Lafayette — a major department store chain in Europe with roots in Paris — to open a branch in the former Bay location. Given Montreal's French character, establishing a store in Montreal would be a natural fit. Robert Hajaly, Montreal Submitting a letter to the editor Letters should be sent by email to letters@ We prioritize letters that respond to, or are inspired by, articles published by The Gazette. If you are responding to a specific article, let us know which one. Letters should be sent uniquely to us. The shorter they are — ideally, fewer than 200 words — the greater the chance of publication. Timing, clarity, factual accuracy and tone are all important, as is whether the writer has something new to add to the conversation. We reserve the right to edit and condense all letters. Care is taken to preserve the core of the writer's argument. Our policy is not to publish anonymous letters, those with pseudonyms or 'open letters' addressed to third parties. Letters are published with the author's full name and city or neighbourhood/borough of residence. Include a phone number and address to help verify identity; these will not be published. We will not indicate to you whether your letter will be published. If it has not been published within 10 days or so, it is not likely to be.
Vancouver Sun
4 hours ago
- Vancouver Sun
Canada's giant immigration industry will have to get used to 'intense' public debate
When I was asked to address members of the immigration division of the Canadian Bar Association, I expected an audience of maybe 25 to 50 lawyers. But last Saturday, 400 immigration lawyers showed up at the Victoria Convention Centre to hear what three Canadian journalists and a think-tank member had to say about the media's impact on migration. The panel was asked to address immigration lawyers' fears that heightened media coverage is 'sparking intense public debate' and influencing 'how immigrants are perceived and how decisions are made.' In addition to offering our thoughts, panel members learned there are actually more than 1,200 immigration lawyers in the Canadian Bar Association, with their numbers mushrooming in the past 15 years. Stay on top of the latest real estate news and home design trends. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Westcoast Homes will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. I noted there are another 13,000 licensed immigration consultants in Canada, a doubling in just seven years. The lawyers in Victoria let us know, justifiably, that the 'consultants' are not as highly trained as lawyers, or as regulated. On top of these private players employed in the migration sector, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada has doubled its staff in a decade to more than 13,000 employees . Altogether, these professionals and workers add up to an army of more than 27,000 immigration specialists (about the same as the number of soldiers and staff employed by Canada's Department of Defence). All make their living helping migrants navigate the complexities of becoming a foreign student, temporary worker, reunified family member, investor immigrant or permanent resident of Canada. In addition, the C.D. Howe Institute maintains another huge cohort that does somewhat the same thing. Unlicensed agents — from the fields of travel, education and labour — also take fees for advising clients on how to get into Canada and stay there. The institute's Tingting Zhang and Parisa Mahboubi, therefore, maintain there should be many more licensed consultants — and that the government should offer better aid to the roughly six million people whose applications are each year processed for entry into Canada. In other words, the 400 lawyers who gathered last week at the Victoria Conference Centre represented just a fragment of the immigration business in Canada. No wonder it's called one of the country's biggest industries. Understandably, the gathered immigration lawyers, the slight majority of whom were women, wanted to do everything they could to help the clients in Canada and around the world who come to them. Their questions and comments all revolved around the hope that borders be more open and the often-labyrinthine migration process easier. They also worried about declining support for immigration. A Leger poll this spring found 58 per cent of Canadians believe migration rates are 'too high' . Even half of those who have been in the country less than a decade feel that way. Given the lawyers' desire to assist their clients, many were wary that in the past two years more journalists have been digging into migration policy and its impact. That's in large part because former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau doubled immigration levels and increased the number of guest workers and foreign students by five times . Almost three million non-permanent residents now comprise 7.3 per cent of the population, up from 1.4 per cent in 2015. The lawyers noted that, after decades in which journalists essentially avoided migration issues, many more articles were being written about such topics as the sudden jump in asylum seekers, tens of thousands of international students not attending school, businesses exploiting temporary workers and population pressures on housing and rents. Two panelists, Toronto Star immigration reporter Nicholas Keung and Steve D'Souza of CBC's Fifth Estate, emphasized the value of talking to migrants to develop poignant 'human interest' stories. They have also investigated how bosses, fly-by-night colleges and some migrants have taken part in scams. In response to CBA's concerns that Canada's media were producing 'stories that have become a lightning rod for public sentiment, shaping how immigrants are perceived and how decisions are made,' the journalists on the panel explained it's our duty to cover migration stories, and all stories, in a way that is 'fair, balanced and accurate.' Although panelist Daniel Bernhard, of the Institute for Canadian Citizenship, correctly said that some journalism about migration is superficial, I suggested it's generally a good thing Canada's long-standing national taboo against reporting on and debating migration policy has eased. Although some politicians, migration lawyers, consultants and other agents may not always like it, I also said journalists' goal is to responsibly probe to the truth of a matter and, beyond that, to 'let the chips fall where they may.' Since my Vancouver Sun editors about a dozen years ago asked me to produce more analyses about migration, I have learned covering the beat essentially amounts to writing about the 'winners and losers' of migration policy, which in Canada is put together behind closed doors. Some examples. Applied ethicists point to how it's one thing for Canadians to worry about a 'brain drain' — about losing talented citizens to places like the U.S. and Singapore. The more worrisome flip side, for countries in Africa and East Asia, is that Canada is actively draining away their brainy people, be they physicians or entrepreneurs. Then there are the 2.8 million temporary workers in Canada, many of them international students paying exorbitant school fees. Some have been winners, getting solid educations and decent jobs in their homelands or permanent residency in Canada. Others have been exploited for their willingness to work for low wages — which has, in turn, been a losing proposition for other low-skill workers in Canada. The job of tracking migration policies' winners and losers is endless, including covering the squeeze that rapid population growth and the trans-national migration of foreign capital is putting on those trying to pay Canadian housing costs and rents . Suffice it to say, journalists' job is to shine as much light as possible on this vast system, which impacts millions. The ultimate goal is to encourage the creation of policies that best serve the most people, which is one way to advance the common good. dtodd@
