Alberta premier says 14 active and proposed federal legal challenges show breadth of Ottawa's overreach

The Alberta government has about 14 active and proposed legal challenges against the federal government alleging constitutional overreach, Premier Danielle Smith said Thursday.

Appearing virtually before a federal parliamentary committee Thursday morning, where she was invited to explain her opposition to the federal carbon tax, Smith said the number of ongoing legal challenges her government has against the federal Liberal government illustrates the degree of federal meddling.

"That should give you an indication of how often we think the federal government violated the spirit of the constitution," Smith told reporters later at an unrelated news conference.

Justice Minister Mickey Amery's office later provided a list of 12 active judicial reviews.

Smith said at the news conference the Alberta government is also analyzing whether it can re-litigate a Supreme Court of Canada decision about the federal carbon tax, now that the government has exempted home heating oil.

Smith also said the federal government's proposed cap on greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas industry is ripe for a court challenge.

Smith said the Alberta government will continue to resist a federal plastics ban. The federal government is appealing a court decision that quashed an order declaring plastics to be a toxic substance.

Later, heading into the legislature, Amery told reporters Alberta has also intervened in a clash between the Ontario government and Ottawa. The federal government had said the controverted Impact Assessment Act's environmental assessment should apply to the planned construction of the 413 freeway around the north and west parts of the Greater Toronto Area.

Amery said Alberta has six ongoing judicial reviews related to the federal firearms ban. And four judicial reviews pertaining to the federal government's use of the Emergencies Act during pandemic restrictions protests in 2022.

"It's not a perception," Amery said. "We know that federal overreach into Alberta's jurisdiction has been an ongoing problem for many years now."

Amery hinted the province is contemplating more legal and policy actions, but said the details are confidential.

WATCH: Danielle Smith says carbon tax is 'reckless, immoral' and 'inhumane': 

"That will become apparent to everyone in short order," he said.

Eric Adams, a constitutional law professor at the University of Alberta, said some provincial and territorial governments are more active than others at putting jurisdictional spats to the test in courtrooms.

He said it's preferable for courts to rule on whether a law or action is constitutional than to have politicians claiming a move is unconstitutional without providing evidence.

The sometimes lengthy court fights are costly, he said, and Alberta citizens will have to decide whether the battles are a good use of public dollars.

Amery said most of the cases are managed by lawyers employed by the provincial government, but he does outsource some legal contracts in more niche areas of law.

In the 2024-25 budget estimates, the Alberta government proposes to spend $61.7 million on its civil law division of the justice department next year, which handles such cases. That would be $4 million more than was budgeted for the service this year, and about $11 million more than the government estimated that it spent this year.

Some governments may perceive leaping into the courts — including intervening in other provinces' fights — as a win-win situation, Adams said. If they're successful in court, the win is a political cudgel, and if they lose, their political supporters will perceive them to be taking action, regardless.

"That in itself becomes evidence in backing up your tough talk," Adams said.

NDP justice critic Irfan Sabir said Smith and her government should spend more time and energy resolving problems within their jurisdiction, including an overtaxed health-care system, schools in desperate need of more buildings and staff, and citizens struggling to afford their rent and bills.

"I think for the most part their arguments may work well with their base, but once they get to the court of law? I think they won't stand," he said.