A Canadian civil liberties group dropped its lawsuit against a Yukon city council after it unanimously voted to amend policies that the group claimed unduly limited residents’ freedom of expression.
The Whitehorse City Council’s “civility policy” initially banned “microaggressions,” signage, apparel with messages, and gave councillors the ability to reject delegations they deemed offensive.
The Canadian Constitution Foundation released a statement claiming victory after the city council amended its policy, removing the four policies which the civil liberties group warned would violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
“Municipalities should think twice before they pass expression-restricting bylaws,” Joanna Baron the executive director of the CCF, said in a statement. “The CCF thanks Vincent Larochelle of Larochelle Law for his successful advocacy in the matter.”
Concerned citizens of Whitehorse, Yukon, reached out to civil rights groups such as the CCF, fearing the policy would limit their freedom of expression at council meetings.
After a previous council voted to pass the policy in August 2024, the CCF sent a letter to the mayor and council, threatening legal action if the policies, which the group found most contentious, were not amended by the next council meeting.
A new council voted unanimously Tuesday to amend the policy, removing the key areas of concern to the CCF, leading the group to drop its appeal for a judicial review with the Supreme Court of Yukon.
“The CCF will drop its judicial review application because it is satisfied that the amended policy, although far from perfect, is sufficiently protective of constitutional rights,” the CCF said in a statement.
“The changes made to the policy that will bring it better in line with the right to freedom of expression.”
The amendments to the “civility policy” dropped the ban on “microaggressions,” and signage in council chambers, except for signs that exceed a certain size, obstruct views, or contain hate speech, threats or incitement to violence.
The policy also no longer allows presiding officers to ban “disrespectful” attire or require that citizens cover up their attire, which the CCF says contains “protected speech,” and residents won’t face censorship for comments the council deems “inappropriate.”
“While imperfect, since there is still a risk that subjectively offensive speech will be silenced, this is a more reasonable policy that better balances council’s goal of maintaining decorum at city council meetings with the rights of citizens who wish to make their viewpoints known in council chambers, whether on a cardboard sign, a pin, a T-shirt or at a podium,” Josh Dehaas, a constitutional lawyer for the CCF, said in a statement.
“If the policy is enforced against a citizen for protected speech, the CCF won’t be afraid to act,” he added. “Freedom of expression protects even the most unpopular viewpoints, and it’s not up to politicians to decide what we may or may not say.”
Christine Van Geyn, the CCF’s litigation director, said the lawsuit should serve as a warning to other municipalities who might follow in the Whitehorse City Council’s footsteps and fail to “properly protect freedom of expression” when drafting bylaws.
“Whitehorse is just one of dozens of municipalities in Canada that have passed unconstitutional bylaws in recent years,” Van Geyn said. “We at the CCF are pushing back, not just through litigation, but also with our upcoming report on Canada’s Worst Censorship Bylaws.”