The Supreme Court of Canada released its much-anticipated decision on the constitutional challenge to federal carbon-pricing legislation on Friday, dismissing the appeal by a 7-2 margin and confirming Parliament's authority to set a minimum national carbon price under the peace, order, and good government head of section 91 of the Constitution Act.
The majority decision, written by Justice Karakatsanis, leaned heavily on the national-concern doctrine and on the prior Reference re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act jurisprudence. The minority — Justices Côté and Brown — would have held that the federal scheme intrudes on provincial jurisdiction over natural resources and property and civil rights.
Reaction from Saskatchewan and Alberta — the two appellants — was swift and predictable. Premier Scott Moe described the decision as "a deep disappointment for jurisdictional federalism," while Premier Danielle Smith called it "a constitutional misstep that will be corrected at the next election by Canadians." The other provinces issued more measured statements.
Substantively, the decision changes nothing about the current carbon-price trajectory, which is fixed by federal regulation through 2030. What it changes is the prospect of a future federal government dismantling the framework on jurisdictional grounds. Such a move could now only proceed by amending or repealing the underlying legislation — a political, not a constitutional, exercise.
Environmental groups including Ecojustice, the Pembina Institute, and Equiterre welcomed the ruling. Business associations split: the Canadian Federation of Independent Business expressed disappointment; the Business Council of Canada said the decision provides regulatory certainty that businesses had been seeking.
The opposition Conservative leader's office said the party would continue to argue against the federal pricing scheme on policy rather than constitutional grounds. The next federal election is expected by October 2027 at the latest.