The Canadian government is facing a significant debate over the role of the judiciary in shaping laws. The Attorney General, appointed by Prime Minister Carney, has requested the Supreme Court of Canada to amend the Constitution to restrict the use of the notwithstanding clause. This move has raised concerns about the balance of power between elected officials and appointed judges.

Critics argue that if the Supreme Court agrees to this request, it could lead to a shift from a democracy governed by elected representatives to a system where appointed judges hold more authority. This change could undermine the democratic process, where elected officials are accountable to the public.

One example cited is a recent ruling in Ontario, where a judge determined that bicycle lanes could not be removed by Premier Ford, despite his government winning three consecutive elections. The judge claimed these lanes were protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This decision has sparked discussions about who should have the final say in governance—elected representatives or appointed judges.

Further examples of judicial rulings that have overridden local laws include a British Columbia judge's decision allowing the consumption of illegal drugs in public playgrounds and an Ontario ruling permitting individuals to set up tents in public parks, despite local council efforts to restore order. Additionally, a court in Alberta ruled in favor of minors seeking gender-changing surgery, countering legislation passed by elected officials.

These instances raise questions about the extent of judicial power and its implications for democracy. Critics argue that allowing judges to make such decisions could lead to a disconnect between the laws and the will of the people. They emphasize the importance of elected officials being the ones to create and enforce laws that reflect the values and needs of their constituents.

Supporters of the current judicial system warn against the dangers of a purely majority-driven governance, which could lead to chaos and disregard for the rule of law. They advocate for a balanced approach where both elected representatives and the judiciary play their respective roles in maintaining order and justice.

The ongoing debate has been intensified by recent events in Parliament, where discussions have been limited. Since Carney's election, the House of Commons has only convened for 25 days, raising concerns about the government's commitment to addressing pressing issues facing Canadians.

As the conversation continues, many Canadians are calling for more dialogue and debate on these critical matters. They believe that a healthy democracy relies on the active participation of its citizens and their elected representatives.