#constitutional-law

The federal government has introduced legislation to amend the Impact Assessment Act following a landmark Supreme Court of Canada ruling that found the law to be largely unconstitutional. The court determined the 2019 law, known as Bill C-69, improperly intruded on provincial jurisdiction over resource projects. The proposed changes aim to narrow the scope of federal reviews, focusing specifically on areas of federal authority like fisheries and Indigenous rights, rather than a project's overall public interest. This move seeks to provide clarity for industry while addressing the constitutional concerns raised by the court and several provinces.

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 federal government has introduced new legislation to overhaul Canada's environmental assessment process for major projects, directly responding to a Supreme Court of Canada opinion that found the previous Impact Assessment Act largely unconstitutional. The proposed law aims to narrow the scope of federal oversight to areas of clear federal jurisdiction, seeking to end a protracted battle with provinces over resource development. While industry groups hope for increased clarity and investment certainty, provincial governments and environmental organizations remain cautious, scrutinizing the bill for signs of federal overreach or weakened environmental protections.

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.