Let Alberta Fill The Supreme Court Vacancy
4,817 signatures
Goal: 10,000 Signatures
Let Alberta Fill The Supreme Court Vacancy
Justice Sheilah Martin (from Alberta) has announced she will be retiring from the Supreme Court of Canada early.
Appointed by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, her term on the court was supposed to last for another 5 years, until 2031.
But this early retirement could prove to have an extremely long-lasting impact on Canadian politics.
Prior to Justice Sheilah Martin’s announcement, there was only one retirement scheduled in the current Parliamentary term, but five scheduled during the next Parliamentary term between 2029 and 2033!
In other words, whoever wins the next election would, within a single term, get to pick an entire majority of the nine-strong Supreme Court.
But now, with one early retirement, Prime Minister Mark Carney will get to make two appointments this term, and there will only be four appointments available in the next term, preventing a prospective new Prime Minister from appointing a majority without winning at least two elections.
Could we see more early retirements to allow Mark Carney more appointments?
Who knows - but there is another way in which the Supreme Court is being manipulated.
As you may already know, the balance of power on Canada’s Supreme Court is skewed in the East’s (and particularly Quebec’s) favour.
Quebec, despite being just 22% of Canada’s population, is guaranteed by the Constitution to receive 33% (three) of the seats on the Court.
All the other provinces have no Constitutionally guaranteed seats, but by convention, Ontario also gets three seats, and Atlantic Canada gets one, while Western Canada, despite having a significantly larger population than Quebec, gets only two seats!
For the record, if seats were being allocated roughly by population, Ontario would still receive three seats, Atlantic Canada would still be entitled to roughly one seat, but Western Canada would get three seats, while Quebec would only get two.
The unfair treatment doesn’t stop with just the number of seats, either.
When Justin Trudeau appointed justices from the West, their judicial philosophies reflected a distinctly left-wing worldview that really doesn’t align with Western Canada’s political culture.
Now, you could say that that’s politics - those who win elections get to appoint people who are appointed by people who win elections, right?
But, can you imagine the uproar if Prime Minister Stephen Harper had tried to appoint a conservative judge to one of Quebec’s three seats?
Actually, you don’t have to imagine!
It happened, there was utter outrage at the idea, Quebec and Quebec lawyers protested, and in the end, the Supreme Court itself blocked the appointment on a technicality.
Prime Minister Carney could follow this pattern and appoint another left-wing activist justice from Alberta.
Or he could start working to fix this imbalance.
Rather than simply following previous partisan patterns, what if he took a different approach to fill this unexpected vacancy?
Just as Albertans are pushing for Prime Ministers to select Senators selected by Albertans, we think Mark Carney should let the Alberta government recommend someone to fill this unexpected empty spot on the Supreme Court.
What better way to ensure that Alberta, and the broader West, has a voice on the Supreme Court that reflects its perspectives on how Confederation is intended to function, as opposed to just having someone with the right postal code.
Quebec demands that its Supreme Court justices understand Quebec culture, Quebec’s unique legal system, and speak French.
(Actually, they have successfully forced a policy change that requires all justices from all provinces speak French).
So, why can’t Alberta and the West’s justices understand western culture, entrepreneurship, freedom, and our interpretation of how Confederation is supposed to work?
We are calling on the federal government to take this opportunity seriously.
At its core, this is a constitutional issue - not just a political one.
The Supreme Court plays a central role in interpreting the Constitution and defining how Confederation actually works in practice.
Over time, the Supreme Court has increasingly shaped federal-provincial relations, often in ways that concentrate power in Ottawa and narrow the scope of provincial autonomy.
Confederation was never meant to be a one-way transfer of authority to the federal government.
The Constitution recognizes provinces as autonomous orders of government, with clear jurisdiction over key areas like natural resources, property rights, and local economic regulation.
Western provinces, and Alberta in particular, have long emphasized this understanding of federalism - one that respects constitutional limits and balances national unity with regional independence.
When Supreme Court justices approach these questions from a worldview shaped primarily by central and eastern Canadian political culture, those Western perspectives are often misunderstood or discounted.
That is why geographic representation alone is not enough.
A justice drawn from Alberta who does not share, or at least seriously engage with, Western views on federalism does little to ensure that the region’s constitutional position is fairly considered.
Alberta deserves a voice on the Supreme Court that reflects its people, its values, and its role within Canada’s confederation.
If you agree, please sign our petition calling on the federal government to Let Alberta Fill The Supreme Court Vacancy:
4,817 signatures
Goal: 10,000 Signatures
Let Alberta Fill The Supreme Court Vacancy
Justice Sheilah Martin (from Alberta) has announced she will be retiring from the Supreme Court of Canada early.
Appointed by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, her term on the court was supposed to last for another 5 years, until 2031.
But this early retirement could prove to have an extremely long-lasting impact on Canadian politics.
Prior to Justice Sheilah Martin’s announcement, there was only one retirement scheduled in the current Parliamentary term, but five scheduled during the next Parliamentary term between 2029 and 2033!
In other words, whoever wins the next election would, within a single term, get to pick an entire majority of the nine-strong Supreme Court.
But now, with one early retirement, Prime Minister Mark Carney will get to make two appointments this term, and there will only be four appointments available in the next term, preventing a prospective new Prime Minister from appointing a majority without winning at least two elections.
Could we see more early retirements to allow Mark Carney more appointments?
Who knows - but there is another way in which the Supreme Court is being manipulated.
As you may already know, the balance of power on Canada’s Supreme Court is skewed in the East’s (and particularly Quebec’s) favour.
Quebec, despite being just 22% of Canada’s population, is guaranteed by the Constitution to receive 33% (three) of the seats on the Court.
All the other provinces have no Constitutionally guaranteed seats, but by convention, Ontario also gets three seats, and Atlantic Canada gets one, while Western Canada, despite having a significantly larger population than Quebec, gets only two seats!
For the record, if seats were being allocated roughly by population, Ontario would still receive three seats, Atlantic Canada would still be entitled to roughly one seat, but Western Canada would get three seats, while Quebec would only get two.
The unfair treatment doesn’t stop with just the number of seats, either.
When Justin Trudeau appointed justices from the West, their judicial philosophies reflected a distinctly left-wing worldview that really doesn’t align with Western Canada’s political culture.
Now, you could say that that’s politics - those who win elections get to appoint people who are appointed by people who win elections, right?
But, can you imagine the uproar if Prime Minister Stephen Harper had tried to appoint a conservative judge to one of Quebec’s three seats?
Actually, you don’t have to imagine!
It happened, there was utter outrage at the idea, Quebec and Quebec lawyers protested, and in the end, the Supreme Court itself blocked the appointment on a technicality.
Prime Minister Carney could follow this pattern and appoint another left-wing activist justice from Alberta.
Or he could start working to fix this imbalance.
Rather than simply following previous partisan patterns, what if he took a different approach to fill this unexpected vacancy?
Just as Albertans are pushing for Prime Ministers to select Senators selected by Albertans, we think Mark Carney should let the Alberta government recommend someone to fill this unexpected empty spot on the Supreme Court.
What better way to ensure that Alberta, and the broader West, has a voice on the Supreme Court that reflects its perspectives on how Confederation is intended to function, as opposed to just having someone with the right postal code.
Quebec demands that its Supreme Court justices understand Quebec culture, Quebec’s unique legal system, and speak French.
(Actually, they have successfully forced a policy change that requires all justices from all provinces speak French).
So, why can’t Alberta and the West’s justices understand western culture, entrepreneurship, freedom, and our interpretation of how Confederation is supposed to work?
We are calling on the federal government to take this opportunity seriously.
At its core, this is a constitutional issue - not just a political one.
The Supreme Court plays a central role in interpreting the Constitution and defining how Confederation actually works in practice.
Over time, the Supreme Court has increasingly shaped federal-provincial relations, often in ways that concentrate power in Ottawa and narrow the scope of provincial autonomy.
Confederation was never meant to be a one-way transfer of authority to the federal government.
The Constitution recognizes provinces as autonomous orders of government, with clear jurisdiction over key areas like natural resources, property rights, and local economic regulation.
Western provinces, and Alberta in particular, have long emphasized this understanding of federalism - one that respects constitutional limits and balances national unity with regional independence.
When Supreme Court justices approach these questions from a worldview shaped primarily by central and eastern Canadian political culture, those Western perspectives are often misunderstood or discounted.
That is why geographic representation alone is not enough.
A justice drawn from Alberta who does not share, or at least seriously engage with, Western views on federalism does little to ensure that the region’s constitutional position is fairly considered.
Alberta deserves a voice on the Supreme Court that reflects its people, its values, and its role within Canada’s confederation.
If you agree, please sign our petition calling on the federal government to Let Alberta Fill The Supreme Court Vacancy:
Who's Signing?
Showing 3123 comments