Patriarchy, Populism, and Anti-Muslim Prejudice

Quebec’s controversial Law 21, An Act Respecting the Laicity of the State, is on its way to the Supreme Court of Canada. The law bans public sector workers in positions of authority—like teachers, police officers, and judges—from wearing religious symbols, all in the name of promoting secularism in the province.

Beneath its appeal to securalism, Law 21 has disproportionately targeted Muslim women who wear hijabs or niqabs. These women are now barred from teaching and excluded from most public sector jobs. The law also mandates that faces must be uncovered to access many public services, effectively excluding women who wear niqabs from participating fully in public life.

Critics argue that this law is blatantly discriminatory, especially on the intersectional grounds of sex and religion. This is why the Quebec government invoked the notwithstanding clause to shield it from certain Charter challenges, but this case also engages Section 28 of the Charter:

“Notwithstanding anything in this Charter, the rights and freedoms referred to in it are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.”

This pivotal legal battle will be the focus of an upcoming panel discussion featuring two of Canada’s leading feminist constitutional scholars. Together, they’ll unpack the complex legal, social, and gendered implications of this landmark case and what it means for the future of rights and freedoms in Canada.

Kerri Froc, Associate Professor, UNB Law School and 2025 Law Foundation of Saskatchewan H. Robert Arscott Chair, Women's Constitutional Rights in a Reactionary Age

Vrinda Narain, Associate Professor McGill Law, How Does it Feel to be a Problem? Inclusion and Exclusion and Quebec’s Law 21

Host or Publisher Centre for Constitutional Studies