At a time when the public is growing more skeptical and disillusioned with our national institutions, one would hope that one of the most influential of those institutions, the Supreme Court of Canada, would give consideration to the implications of its public statements and its governance policies. This is important if for no other reason than to maintain the public’s confidence in the administration of justice, since our “free and democratic society” requires an impartial and independent judicial system.
Wagner’s Judicial Temperament
It is apparent, however, that Chief Justice Richard Wagner is not prepared to undertake such consideration. Instead, since his appointment as Chief Justice in 2017, he has spoken out on political matters and has made decisions about the court that have weakened public confidence in it. He has done this despite the fact that the Canadian Judicial Council, of which Wagner is Chair, has provided guidance to judges in a publication entitled Ethical Principles for Judges. It states, among other things, “Judges should be cautious in their communications on social media relating to matters that come before the court.” The guidelines also stress, “Given the independence accorded to judges, they share a collective responsibility to promote high standards of conduct.”
Chief Justice Wagner, however, apparently believes that the guidelines do not apply to him. For example, at the time of the Freedom Convoy’s arrival in Ottawa in February 2022, Wagner pronounced that the action of the truckers was the beginning of anarchy. In an interview with the Montreal newspaper, Le Devoir, in June 2022, Wagner stated that the convoy was “a small beginning of anarchy where some people decided to take other citizens hostage and to take the law into their own hands”. He also stated in a free-wheeling press conference on June 3rd, 2022, among other controversial remarks, that the Convoy participants were “deplorable”. Instead of offering his commentary on the events of the day, he should not have said anything at all. Wagner ought to have known that the legality of the Declaration made under the Emergencies Act would eventually come before the Supreme Court. A court challenge had already been initiated at that time by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. It had stated on February 22nd, 2022 “We are taking the Government of Canada to court”. The Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal have both unanimously ruled that the federal government was unreasonable in invoking the Emergencies Act, lacking evidence to do so as well as an unjustified violation of ss. 2(b) (freedom of expression) and 8 (right against unreasonable search and seizure).
The Carney government appealed the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision to the Supreme Court of Canada in March 2026. Since Wagner had previously expressed his opinion on this significant matter, when he characterized the Freedom Convoy participants as “anarchists” and “deplorables”, he should have properly recused himself from the case. Wagner, however, refused to do so stating that the Convoy protestors were not an issue in the proceedings. This is nonsense since the Freedom Convoy was the central event that led to the declaration of the Emergencies Act. As a result, the Supreme Court will have to determine whether the government’s actions were reasonable in invoking the Act. Wagner has already answered the question in his public statements on the event, and any reasonable member of the public would be justified in assuming that Wagner was biased and will not be impartial in the case. Wagner’s refusal to recuse himself clearly undermines the public’s confidence in the court and brings the administration of justice into disrepute.
Wagner’s Governance of the Supreme Court of Canada
As Chief Justice, Wagner is, amongst other things, responsible for the administration of the Supreme Court. His ability to meet those responsibilities in this area is not without serious problems.
Bronze Statue of Wagner
Wagner accepted a bronze bust of himself, paid by an anonymous donor which he proudly placed at the entrance of the Supreme Court. When questions about the funding for this bronze bust arose, the court officials stated that the donor was anonymous and refused to release his name. This raised serious questions as to whether the donor will receive favoritism from the court.
Press Release Supports Feminism
In March 2024, under the direction of Chief Justice Wagner, the Supreme Court of Canada issued a press release which included a photograph depicting the five female members of the Supreme Court. The commentary provided in the press release created controversy by adding “achieving gender parity among judges at all levels in Canada is a step in the right direction towards having greater diversity on the bench”. The views on whether a judge should be appointed on the basis of gender is a political issue on which Canadians are divided. There are many Canadians who believe that judges should be appointed on the basis of merit, that is, on the basis of their knowledge of the law and their ability to impartially interpret the law.
Additional Role for the Supreme Court
Since Wagner was appointed Chief Justice, the court has assumed an additional role, one of being an information and entertainment centre. In addition to its website, the court has become an active user of social media, such as “X” (formerly Twitter), Facebook, LinkedIn and Instagram. Presumably this is to enlighten ignorant Canadians about the genius of the judges’ decisions.
Children’s Playground
Under Wagner’s leadership, the court appears to have entered a children’s playground. The court has acquired a mascot who is called AMICUS the Owl. The Owl is known for its wisdom. Further, the Supreme Court has published a Youth Activity Book, with pages to colour and puzzles to complete, part of the court’s outreach to primary and secondary school students. AMICUS the Owl is quoted in the Activity Book, “I am very proud to have been chosen to represent the highest court in the country.” The booklet goes on to explain, “The Owl is a good ambassador for the Supreme Court because it symbolizes wisdom and learning.” It is unlikely, however, that young children would have an interest in, or a capacity to understand the complexities of the judicial system.
Flag for the Court
Further, the Supreme Court has acquired its own flag at the centre of which there are nine glittering diamonds, presumably to represent the sparkling brilliance of the judges on the court. The flag is to fly above the court building when the court is in session, much like the Royal Standard flies over a palace signaling the presence of the monarch at a royal residence. Does anyone seriously think that Canadians need to be assured that the royal judges are in residence keeping the country safe?
Wagner’s Jurisprudence
Since Wagner’s appointment to the Supreme Court in 2012, he has been a reliable member of the Court’s progressive wing. For example, the 2013 decision in Trinity Western University v. Law Society of Upper Canada, in which homosexual rights were given priority over religious rights, continuing the court’s long-term trend of giving homosexuality priority over religious freedoms . Also in 2013, in the case, Attorney General v. Bedford, the court struck down Canada’s prostitution laws because they were harmful to prostitutes, thereby ignoring the fact that the prostitution laws were to protect the public.
In 2015, in Carter v. Canada (Attorney General), the court broke the historical precedent of protecting human life, when it permitted physicians to kill their patients as a method of treatment. Also in 2015, in Movement Laïque Québécois v. Saguenay (City), the court prohibited the city councillors of Saguenay from opening their meetings with a Christian prayer even though 94% of the community of Saguenay were Christian.
The woke progressiveness of the Supreme Court of Canada was evident in March 2024 in R. v. Kruk, when Justice Sheilah Martin, in her opinion, joined by five of her colleagues, including Wagner, described the female victim in a sexual assault case (which had nothing to do with transgenderism) as “a person with a vagina” (presumably to distinguish her from “women” who have penises). This created an uproar in the media and the Quebec National Assembly, which anonymously passed a motion denouncing Martin for the use of the term “a person with a vagina”.
Since becoming Chief Justice in 2017, Wagner has authored such problematic opinions as the 2019 decision in Frank v. Canada (Attorney General) which refused to acknowledge that non-resident voting restrictions under the Canada Elections Act was a reasonable limit on the right to vote. Wagner wrote the majority opinion in References re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, (which dealt with whether the federal government had the authority to impose the carbon tax). In this decision the court rewrote the provision for “Peace, Order, and Good Government” in our Constitution to widen the powers of the federal government to override, among other things, matters relating to provincial jurisdiction, at its own discretion. In short, the decision provided the federal government with a power grab.
Wagner’s Lack of Insight
Chief Justice Wagner was speaking the truth when he stated that he was proud that the Supreme Court of Canada was “the most progressive in the world” (Toronto Star, June 24, 2018). In doing so, however, Wagner clearly evidenced a complete lack of insight into the proper judicial role in a Constitutional Monarchy based upon the principle of Responsible Government.
Instead of looking in the mirror at his and his colleagues’ controversial decisions, on June 3rd, 2024, in an hour-long press conference, Wagner lashed out at the public, the media and politicians, complaining that they are undermining the judiciary with their criticism. The answer to Wagner’s complaint is that in order to put a stop to criticism, the judges should navigate in their own waters and not overreach their jurisdiction by making controversial public statements and handing down creative decisions based on the latest ideology rather than the law and legal precedence.
The Costs of Judicial Activism
It is getting harder to dismiss decisions of the Supreme Court as being merely ridiculous aberrations of a progressive agenda. The reality is that these decisions are causing deep and open wounds in the fabric of Canadian society. Although such decisions are approved by the progressive elitists who are controlling the national agenda, they are not acceptable to the majority of Canadians who are not living their lives in a leftist fantasy world. In handing down so many decisions that are clearly left of centre, the Supreme Court is alienating most Canadians who do not accept the absurdities that the court is presenting to them.
As REAL Women stated in a previous REALity Update (“The Supreme Court of Canada is a Circus”, August 5, 2024):
Public acceptance and support of court decisions depend on public confidence in the integrity and independence of judges. This depends upon the judiciary upholding a high standard of conduct. The Supreme Court’s lapses in judgement are unfortunate at a number of levels, quite apart from the damage they do to the Court’s integrity and public confidence in the justice system. First, they obscure the fact that a number of judges on the court are hardworking and deserve respect on their merits, not just because of the office they hold. Second, lapses in judgement tend to lessen the moral authority of the court and its legal judgements. Finally, the increasing number of lapses in judgement detract from the more serious scrutiny of actual judgements of the court in cases that have a profound impact on all Canadians.
The Supreme Court’s judicial activism combined with the daftness and the lack of judicial temperament of its Chief Justice are not optimal for maintaining public confidence in the administration of justice or in judicial independence and impartiality. Wagner’s refusal to recuse himself in the case of the Emergencies Act is yet another powerful indication of the problems that Wagner is creating in the Canadian justice system.