#alberta

The Supreme Court of Canada has delivered a landmark ruling, finding key provisions of the federal Impact Assessment Act unconstitutional. In a 5-2 decision, the court concluded that the law, which assesses major energy and infrastructure projects, oversteps federal authority and infringes on provincial jurisdiction over natural resources. The ruling is a significant victory for Alberta and other provinces that challenged the legislation, often dubbed the "no-pipelines law." The federal government must now rewrite its environmental assessment framework, creating uncertainty for future resource development across Canada.

The Supreme Court of Canada has delivered a landmark opinion, finding the federal Impact Assessment Act largely unconstitutional in a major victory for Alberta and other provinces. The Court ruled that the 2019 law, often criticized as the "No More Pipelines" bill, improperly intruded on provincial jurisdiction over resource development. By focusing on a project's overall effects rather than those specifically within federal authority, the legislation created an unconstitutional overreach. The decision compels Ottawa to redraft its environmental review process, significantly altering the landscape for major energy and infrastructure projects across Canada.

The Supreme Court of Canada has delivered a significant advisory opinion, finding the federal Impact Assessment Act (IAA) to be largely unconstitutional. In a 5-2 decision, the court ruled that the legislation, formerly known as Bill C-69, oversteps federal authority by infringing on areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction over resource development. The ruling states the law's focus on overall "public interest" is too broad, effectively giving Ottawa a veto over projects primarily within provincial control. The decision sends the federal government back to the drawing board to redraft legislation governing major project approvals.

The Supreme Court of Canada has delivered a landmark ruling, finding the federal Impact Assessment Act largely unconstitutional. In a 5-2 decision, the majority opinion stated that the 2019 law, known as Bill C-69, oversteps federal authority by infringing on powers exclusively granted to the provinces under the Constitution. The court found the Act's 'public interest' determination treated all major projects as inherently federal, regardless of their primary jurisdiction. This decision represents a significant victory for provinces like Alberta and Saskatchewan, forcing Ottawa to rewrite its environmental review legislation for major resource projects.

The Supreme Court of Canada, in a 5-2 majority decision, has issued an advisory opinion stating that the federal Impact Assessment Act is largely unconstitutional. The court found that the law, which assesses the environmental and social impacts of major resource and infrastructure projects, oversteps federal authority and infringes on provincial jurisdiction over natural resources. The ruling represents a significant victory for Alberta and other provinces that challenged the legislation. The federal government has acknowledged the decision and has pledged to revise the law to align with the court's guidance.

The Supreme Court of Canada, in a landmark 5-2 decision, has found the federal Impact Assessment Act to be largely unconstitutional. The court ruled that the legislation, which assesses the environmental and social impacts of major resource and infrastructure projects, oversteps federal jurisdiction and infringes on powers reserved for the provinces. Chief Justice Richard Wagner, writing for the majority, stated the law's focus on a project's overall "public interest" was too broad. The ruling is a significant victory for Alberta and other provinces, potentially streamlining approvals for future energy projects.

The Supreme Court of Canada has delivered a landmark ruling, finding the federal government's Impact Assessment Act is largely unconstitutional. In a 5-2 decision, the court sided with Alberta and other provinces, concluding the legislation oversteps federal authority by intruding into areas of provincial jurisdiction over resource development. The ruling strikes down key provisions of the 2019 law, often called the 'No More Pipelines Act' by critics. The federal government must now redraft the legislation, creating significant uncertainty for major energy and mining projects across the country.

The Supreme Court of Canada, in a 5-2 majority decision, has issued an advisory opinion stating that the federal Impact Assessment Act is largely unconstitutional. The court found that the 2019 law, known as Bill C-69, oversteps federal jurisdiction by treating all major projects as federal matters, thereby infringing on provincial powers over natural resources. The ruling sides with Alberta and other provinces who argued the law gave Ottawa a de facto veto over projects within their domain. The federal government must now revise the legislation to align with the constitutional division of powers.

The Supreme Court of Canada has delivered a landmark ruling, finding the federal Impact Assessment Act largely unconstitutional. In a 5-2 decision, the court determined the legislation, known as Bill C-69, overstepped federal authority by infringing on exclusive provincial jurisdiction over natural resources and local projects. The judgment represents a significant victory for provinces like Alberta, which challenged the law as an intrusion on their economic sovereignty. The federal government must now redraft the legislation, creating immediate uncertainty for major resource projects while potentially clarifying regulatory pathways in the long term.

The Supreme Court of Canada has issued a landmark advisory opinion, ruling in a 5-2 decision that the federal Impact Assessment Act is largely unconstitutional. The majority found the legislation, which assesses major energy and infrastructure projects, oversteps federal authority by intruding into areas of provincial jurisdiction. The ruling is a significant victory for provinces like Alberta and Saskatchewan, which challenged the law, arguing it hindered resource development. The federal government must now revise the legislation, creating a period of regulatory uncertainty for major projects across the country.