logo
Libman: Quebec remains in Carney's corner, but danger lies ahead

Libman: Quebec remains in Carney's corner, but danger lies ahead

It's been over two months since Mark Carney was elected as our Captain Canada. Most voters felt he was best suited to navigate us through the turbulent waters churned by one very unpredictable U.S. president, with difficult trade negotiations ahead and recurring threats about our sovereignty. Many today would likely agree that he has been earning the confidence granted to him by voters. Carney seems to possess the right temperament and has shown, at least so far, that he can skilfully manoeuvre, plus choose the right words, in the difficult balancing act of dealing with Donald Trump's volatility.
Carney's popularity has particularly solidified in Quebec. Despite him being considered an outsider, raised in Edmonton, his Liberals surprisingly dominated this province in the election, with their best result in 45 years. A June 28 Léger poll shows confidence in him has grown, with 58 per cent of Quebecers satisfied with his government. Surprisingly, that number hits 60 per cent among voters of the separatist Parti Québécois and Bloc Québécois.
Carney has also bolstered his inner circle with prominent Quebec heavyweights, including Michael Sabia — one of Quebec's most respected business leaders — as incoming clerk of the Privy Council, the head of public service. Marc-André Blanchard, a Montreal lawyer and former ambassador to the United Nations, is his new chief of staff. He named François-Philippe Champagne as finance minister, Mélanie Joly as industry minister, and former MP and justice minister David Lametti as his principal secretary. Premier François Legault, who has been somewhat of a cheerleader for Carney, said after the election that ' Mr. Carney owes one to Quebecers. ' He's delivered so far.
But rocky waters lie ahead. While Carney and his inner circle have economic heft and credibility to make the case to Quebecers regarding issues including trade, supply management and pipelines, how will they manage the perilous issues of identity and language?
With cases on secularism law Bill 21 and language law Bill 96 winding their way toward the Supreme Court, nationalist opinion leaders who have been rueing Carney's popularity in Quebec are waiting to pounce.
Carney has said if these Quebec laws were tested before the Supreme Court, his government would defend the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and intervene. Nationalist Quebecers jumped, as did ministers from the Coalition Avenir Québec government. Carney has been evasive since, suggesting it's the pre-emptive use of the notwithstanding clause — used to shield these laws from most of the charter — that his government would contest, not necessarily the substance of the laws themselves, which many believe clearly infringe on minority and linguistic rights.
When push comes to shove, what will Carney do?
His Quebec inner circle will undoubtedly want him to avoid riling up the nationalist hornets' nest at all costs. Will he thus completely reverse course and decide not to intervene in these cases, throwing minorities overboard?
Another scenario, as he already hinted, would be to formulate opposition to the pre-emptive use of the notwithstanding clause in general — perhaps establishing a more rigorous framework while referring to its uses in Ontario and elsewhere, steering clear of the substance of the Quebec laws.
Or maybe he could show some genuine leadership and prowess. Is it too much to expect for our prime minister — while affirming that Quebec values such as secularism and protecting French are important — to argue that the laws in question go too far?
Most Quebecers respect Carney, seem willing to listen to him and are receptive to strong leadership and reason. If he is capable enough to navigate his way around the tempestuousness of Donald Trump, steering through the upcoming nationalist storm over his government's intervention in these court challenges should be relatively easy — and an important leadership test of Captain Canada.
Robert Libman is an architect and planning consultant who has served as Equality Party leader and MNA, mayor of Côte-St-Luc and a member of the Montreal executive committee. He was a Conservative candidate in the 2015 federal election.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Another federal court blocks Trump's push to end birthright citizenship
Another federal court blocks Trump's push to end birthright citizenship

Vancouver Sun

time7 hours ago

  • Vancouver Sun

Another federal court blocks Trump's push to end birthright citizenship

BOSTON — A federal judge on Friday blocked the Trump administration from ending birthright citizenship for the children of parents who are in the U.S. illegally, issuing the third court ruling blocking the birthright order nationwide since a key Supreme Court decision in June. U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin, joining another district court as well as an appellate panel of judges, found that a nationwide injunction granted to more than a dozen states remains in force under an exception to the Supreme Court ruling. That decision restricted the power of lower-court judges to block government actions on a nationwide basis. The states have argued Trump's birthright citizenship order is blatantly unconstitutional and threatens millions of dollars for health insurance services that are contingent on citizenship status. The issue is expected to move quickly back to the nation's highest court. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. 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 Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. Lawyers for the government had argued Sorokin should narrow the reach of his earlier ruling granting a preliminary injunction, arguing it should be 'tailored to the States' purported financial injuries.' 'The record does not support a finding that any narrower option would feasibly and adequately protect the plaintiffs from the injuries they have shown they are likely to suffer,' Sorokin wrote. Sorokin acknowledged his order would not be the last word on birthright citizenship. Trump and his administration 'are entitled to pursue their interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, and no doubt the Supreme Court will ultimately settle the question,' Sorokin wrote. 'But in the meantime, for purposes of this lawsuit at this juncture, the Executive Order is unconstitutional.' The administration has not yet appealed any of the recent court rulings. Trump's efforts to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily will remain blocked unless and until the Supreme Court says otherwise. An email asking for the White House's response to the ruling was sent Friday. A federal judge in New Hampshire issued a ruling earlier this month prohibiting Trump's executive order from taking effect nationwide in a new class-action lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Joseph LaPlante in New Hampshire had paused his own decision to allow for the Trump administration to appeal, but with no appeal filed in the last week, his order went into effect. On Wednesday, a San Francisco-based appeals court found the president's executive order unconstitutional and affirmed a lower court's nationwide block. A Maryland-based judge said this week that she would do the same if an appeals court signed off. The justices ruled last month that lower courts generally can't issue nationwide injunctions, but it didn't rule out other court orders that could have nationwide effects, including in class-action lawsuits and those brought by states. The Supreme Court did not decide whether the underlying citizenship order is constitutional. Plaintiffs in the Boston case earlier argued that the principle of birthright citizenship is 'enshrined in the Constitution,' and that Trump does not have the authority to issue the order, which they called a 'flagrantly unlawful attempt to strip hundreds of thousands of American-born children of their citizenship based on their parentage.' They also argue that Trump's order halting automatic citizenship for babies born to people in the U.S. illegally or temporarily would cost states funding they rely on to 'provide essential services' — from foster care to health care for low-income children, to 'early interventions for infants, toddlers, and students with disabilities.' At the heart of the lawsuits is the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which was ratified in 1868 after the Civil War and the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision. That decision found that Scott, an enslaved man, wasn't a citizen despite having lived in a state where slavery was outlawed. The Trump administration has asserted that children of noncitizens are not 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States and therefore not entitled to citizenship. ____ Associated Press reporter Mark Sherman in Washington contributed. Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here .

Another federal court blocks Trump's push to end birthright citizenship
Another federal court blocks Trump's push to end birthright citizenship

Edmonton Journal

time7 hours ago

  • Edmonton Journal

Another federal court blocks Trump's push to end birthright citizenship

FILE - Demonstrators holds up a banner during a citizenship rally outside of the Supreme Court in Washington, May 15, 2025. Photo by Jose Luis Magana / AP BOSTON — A federal judge on Friday blocked the Trump administration from ending birthright citizenship for the children of parents who are in the U.S. illegally, issuing the third court ruling blocking the birthright order nationwide since a key Supreme Court decision in June. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Exclusive articles by David Staples, Keith Gerein and others, Oilers news from Cult of Hockey, Ask EJ Anything features, the Noon News Roundup and Under the Dome newsletters. Unlimited online access to Edmonton Journal and 15 news sites with one account. Edmonton Journal ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles, including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Exclusive articles by David Staples, Keith Gerein and others, Oilers news from Cult of Hockey, Ask EJ Anything features, the Noon News Roundup and Under the Dome newsletters. Unlimited online access to Edmonton Journal and 15 news sites with one account. Edmonton Journal ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles, including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin, joining another district court as well as an appellate panel of judges, found that a nationwide injunction granted to more than a dozen states remains in force under an exception to the Supreme Court ruling. That decision restricted the power of lower-court judges to block government actions on a nationwide basis. The states have argued Trump's birthright citizenship order is blatantly unconstitutional and threatens millions of dollars for health insurance services that are contingent on citizenship status. The issue is expected to move quickly back to the nation's highest court. Get the latest headlines, breaking news and columns. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again Lawyers for the government had argued Sorokin should narrow the reach of his earlier ruling granting a preliminary injunction, arguing it should be 'tailored to the States' purported financial injuries.' 'The record does not support a finding that any narrower option would feasibly and adequately protect the plaintiffs from the injuries they have shown they are likely to suffer,' Sorokin wrote. Sorokin acknowledged his order would not be the last word on birthright citizenship. Trump and his administration 'are entitled to pursue their interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, and no doubt the Supreme Court will ultimately settle the question,' Sorokin wrote. 'But in the meantime, for purposes of this lawsuit at this juncture, the Executive Order is unconstitutional.' The administration has not yet appealed any of the recent court rulings. Trump's efforts to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily will remain blocked unless and until the Supreme Court says otherwise. An email asking for the White House's response to the ruling was sent Friday. A federal judge in New Hampshire issued a ruling earlier this month prohibiting Trump's executive order from taking effect nationwide in a new class-action lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Joseph LaPlante in New Hampshire had paused his own decision to allow for the Trump administration to appeal, but with no appeal filed in the last week, his order went into effect. On Wednesday, a San Francisco-based appeals court found the president's executive order unconstitutional and affirmed a lower court's nationwide block.

Another federal court blocks Trump's push to end birthright citizenship
Another federal court blocks Trump's push to end birthright citizenship

National Post

time7 hours ago

  • National Post

Another federal court blocks Trump's push to end birthright citizenship

FILE - Demonstrators holds up a banner during a citizenship rally outside of the Supreme Court in Washington, May 15, 2025. Photo by Jose Luis Magana / AP BOSTON — A federal judge on Friday blocked the Trump administration from ending birthright citizenship for the children of parents who are in the U.S. illegally, issuing the third court ruling blocking the birthright order nationwide since a key Supreme Court decision in June. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS Enjoy the latest local, national and international news. Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events. Unlimited online access to National Post. National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE ARTICLES Enjoy the latest local, national and international news. Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events. Unlimited online access to National Post. National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin, joining another district court as well as an appellate panel of judges, found that a nationwide injunction granted to more than a dozen states remains in force under an exception to the Supreme Court ruling. That decision restricted the power of lower-court judges to block government actions on a nationwide basis. The states have argued Trump's birthright citizenship order is blatantly unconstitutional and threatens millions of dollars for health insurance services that are contingent on citizenship status. The issue is expected to move quickly back to the nation's highest court. Get a dash of perspective along with the trending news of the day in a very readable format. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again Lawyers for the government had argued Sorokin should narrow the reach of his earlier ruling granting a preliminary injunction, arguing it should be 'tailored to the States' purported financial injuries.' 'The record does not support a finding that any narrower option would feasibly and adequately protect the plaintiffs from the injuries they have shown they are likely to suffer,' Sorokin wrote. Sorokin acknowledged his order would not be the last word on birthright citizenship. Trump and his administration 'are entitled to pursue their interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, and no doubt the Supreme Court will ultimately settle the question,' Sorokin wrote. 'But in the meantime, for purposes of this lawsuit at this juncture, the Executive Order is unconstitutional.' The administration has not yet appealed any of the recent court rulings. Trump's efforts to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily will remain blocked unless and until the Supreme Court says otherwise. An email asking for the White House's response to the ruling was sent Friday. A federal judge in New Hampshire issued a ruling earlier this month prohibiting Trump's executive order from taking effect nationwide in a new class-action lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Joseph LaPlante in New Hampshire had paused his own decision to allow for the Trump administration to appeal, but with no appeal filed in the last week, his order went into effect. On Wednesday, a San Francisco-based appeals court found the president's executive order unconstitutional and affirmed a lower court's nationwide block. A Maryland-based judge said this week that she would do the same if an appeals court signed off. The justices ruled last month that lower courts generally can't issue nationwide injunctions, but it didn't rule out other court orders that could have nationwide effects, including in class-action lawsuits and those brought by states. The Supreme Court did not decide whether the underlying citizenship order is constitutional.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store