Québec’s Bill 9 Infringes on Religious Freedom, Expression, Assembly, and Equality
An analysis of Québec’s proposed ban on public prayer, and related legal developments
Christian Legal Fellowship is deeply troubled by the mounting legislative suppression of religion in Québec in the name of laïcité (secularism), now with the introduction of Bill 9.[1] This proposed law:
Expands the province’s ban on religious symbols established under Bill 21 (enacted in 2019), and Bill 94 (enacted on October 30, 2025);
Generally bans “all religious practice” in certain public institutions like colleges and universities;
Prohibits “collective religious practice” within any public parks or on public sidewalks and footpaths without prior municipal authorization; and
Moves to revoke and/or deny accreditation for subsidies for religious private schools.
BANNING ALL “RELIGIOUS PRACTICES” IN COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES
Bill 9, if enacted, would prohibit “all religious practice” in places under the “authority” of certain public institutions, including colleges and universities. The Bill defines “religious practice” very broadly to mean any action “that may reasonably constitute, in fact or in appearance, the manifestation of a religious conviction or belief”.[2] Only the wearing of a religious symbol is excepted, although that too is banned in other contexts (see below).
While this prohibition has been described as banning university “prayer rooms”—which is problematic in itself[3]—it seems to go much further. On its face, the Bill appears to prohibit students from gathering anywhere on university campuses to pray, worship, or even study the Bible together, subject to some limited exceptions.
Minister Jean-François Roberge, who introduced the Bill, commented: “[…] universities are not a temple or a church.”[4]
The Bill does prescribe an exception for situations where a space is “leased according to the conditions determined by government regulation” (which are yet to be announced), but this is only permitted if the body does “not, directly or indirectly, finance the religious practice”.[5]
CLF is concerned that this rule would unfairly target religious students and restrict their campus activities solely because of their religious affiliation.
BANNING COLLECTIVE RELIGIOUS PRACTICES IN PUBLIC PLACES & REPEALING THE FREEDOM OF WORSHIP ACT
Another drastic measure of Bill 9 is its blanket prohibition on all “collective religious practice” within any public parks or on public sidewalks and footpaths.[6] The only prescribed exception is if approval is pre-obtained by “resolution of the municipal council”, which will only be granted “exceptionally and on a case-by-case basis”[7]—and even then, only where certain prescribed conditions are met, including that the religious practice “is of short duration”.[8] The term “collective” is not defined, but “religious practice” is given the same broad definition as above.[9]
It seems this provision could prohibit two or more co-religionists from engaging in any type of religious activity together, potentially including evangelism, open-air worship or prayer, or distribution of religious literature, on sidewalks or in public parks, without prior authorization from the municipality.
This ban on public religious activities has drawn widespread criticism.[10] CLF is deeply concerned that this Bill would unfairly censor certain types of public expression and outdoor gatherings for no reason other than the fact that they are religious. This type of law harkens back to the mid-1900’s when certain provinces and municipalities tried to limit evangelistic activities. The Supreme Court of Canada at that time ruled such limits were ultra vires the municipalities and provinces.[11]
Bill 9 also repeals Québec’s longstanding Freedom of Worship Act,[12] which, among other protections, guarantees “[t]he free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, provided the same be not made an excuse for acts of licentiousness or a justification of practices inconsistent with the peace and safety of Québec”.[13]
BUILDING ON QUÉBEC’S SCHOOL PRAYER BAN & TARGETING RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION IN SCHOOLS
Another Québec law, Bill 94 (which received assent on October 30, 2025[14]) prohibits students and others from engaging in “religious practices such as overt prayers or other similar practices” on public elementary and high school properties.[15]
Bill 94 codifies and extends Decree 707-2023 (“the Decree”), Québec’s prayer ban policy adopted on April 19, 2023. In AB c Procureur général du Québec,[16] the Québec Court of Appeal refused to suspend the Decree pending the hearing of a constitutional challenge. CLF was granted leave to intervene in this matter before the Superior Court of Québec. The trial was scheduled for late 2025, but is now postponed due to the new legislation.[17] Unlike the Decree, Bill 94 explicitly invokes the Charter’s notwithstanding clause,[18] as does Bill 9.[19]
In addition, Bill 94 bans the use of premises at the “disposal” of a school service centre “for the purposes of religious practices such as overt prayers or other similar practices”.[20] Bill 9 now appears to make it illegal for churches to rent spaces in public elementary and high schools on weekends for collective worship, when considered together with Bill 94.[21]
Bill 9 also further moves to revoke and/or deny accreditation for subsidies for any private school whose teachings involve religious precepts or “the transmission of religious convictions or beliefs” or that hires staff based on religious criteria.[24] This seems to capture all religious schools. While Bill 9 does not deny such religious schools to exist at all, the lack of accreditation and funding risks undermining these institutions and their ability to operate, especially if they have received this funding in the past.
OTHER MEASURES TO REINFORCE LAICITY IN QUÉBEC
Bill 9 is the latest in a series of legislative initiatives in Québec seeking to establish laïcité in the province, beginning with 2019’s Bill 21, the Laicity Act, which “enshrines” the “paramountcy of State laicity [in] Québec’s legal order” and prohibits a number of professions from wearing religious symbols—including lawyers who work for, or are under contract with, the government. Bill 21 has prevented openly religious lawyers from becoming Crown prosecutors or working in the public sector.[25] CLF has opposed this exclusion of openly religious lawyers and others, from public service, and is intervening before the Supreme Court of Canada in March 2026 in a constitutional challenge to the Bill.
Since Bill 21 was enacted in 2019, the province has continued to expand its scope. Bill 94 now compels “any person” providing “services” to students on educational premises, to refrain from wearing religious symbols.[26] Bill 9 would further extend the province’s ban on religious symbols to staff at daycares and in subsidized private schools.[27]
The Act respecting integration into the Québec nation, passed earlier this year, requires all private citizens to “adhere and contribute to” a “common culture” founded upon the laïcité of the state.[28] The Québec Charter has also been amended to require all private citizens to exercise their human rights and freedoms with proper regard to laicity, which is of “fundamental importance”.[29]
Further, the Québec government introduced the Québec Constitution Act, 2025 on October 9, 2025.[30] This Act states itself to be “the law of laws”, taking “precedence over any inconsistent rule of law”[31] and proposes to:
enshrine laïcité as a “founding principle” and “fundamental characteristic” of Québec;[32]
amend the Constitution Act, 1867 to state that “Québec is a lay State”;[33]
create “intrinsic and inalienable collective rights”, including the right to “public services that are lay institutions and services”;[34]
require that the Québec Charter be “interpreted in harmony with … State laicity”;[35]
amend the Québec Charter to state that “in case of conflict between the exercise of the right to equality of women and men and the exercise of freedom of religion, the former prevails.”[36]
Finally, a committee tasked by the Québec government to study how to strengthen laïcité in the province recently published a report with 50 recommendations, including:
repealing the “advancement of religion” criterion for the recognition of registered charities;
eliminating tax exemptions and deductions, such as those for members of the clergy and other religious leaders and those relating to municipal taxation;
requiring schools to document religious influences promoting fasting among school-aged children.[37]
EXCLUDING OPENLY RELIGIOUS INDIVIDUALS FROM PUBLIC LIFE
CLF’s Executive Director and General Counsel Derek Ross has commented that this conception of laïcité “purports to be advancing religious neutrality, but it is promoting the exact opposite: a public square which is closed, not neutral, toward religion – and by extension, toward openly religious people.”
Individuals are not required to be religiously neutral—the government is.[38] These proposed laws represent a marked departure from the constitutional state-religion framework articulated by the Supreme Court of Canada—which prohibits excluding or disadvantaging religion categorically[39]—and an adoption of a closed secularism that effectively promotes the activities and expression of non-believers in public spaces and institutions, to the exclusion of openly religious individuals. CLF has argued that these rules enshrine irreligion, rather than neutrality, as the state’s official doctrine.
CLF remains deeply engaged in these issues, having been granted leave to intervene in the Bill 21 litigation, the challenge to Québec’s student prayer ban, and a case involving the Québec government’s cancellation of a Christian event at a publicly owned conference centre.[40] CLF will continue to advocate for the full and equal participation of religious citizens in public life.
Further Reading
CLF’s intervention factum in the Bill 21 litigation (Supreme Court of Canada)
CLF’s position on the constitutional challenge to Bill 21
CLF’s advocacy on religious freedom and equality in Québec
CLF’s intervention in the challenge to Québec’s 2023 ban of student-initiated religious practices on school grounds
CLF’s defence of religious groups’ access to public services and spaces
CLF’s support of “advancement of religion” as a charitable purpose in Québec and Canada
REFERENCES
[1] Bill 9, An Act respecting the reinforcement of laicity in Québec, 2nd Sess, 43rd Leg, Québec, 2025 (introduced by Mr. Jean-François Roberge, “Minister Responsible for Laicity”), online: https://www.assnat.qc.ca/en/travaux-parlementaires/projets-loi/projet-loi-9-43-2.html [Bill 9].
[2] Bill 9, s 9 (see s 10.1).
[3] Benjamin Shingler, “Quebec’s new secularism bill targets daycare workers, prayer spaces and religious meals” CBC News (27 November 2025) online: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-secularism-bill-9.6993278.
[4] Ibid (see video).
[5] Bill 9, s 9 (see s 10.2). See also s.10.1(4) where a private residence is also excluded. This may mean that a religious gathering in a dorm room could be permissible.
[6] Bill 9, s 27 (see s 2).
[7] Bill 9, s 27 (see s 2).
[8] Bill 9, s 27 (see s 3).
[9] Bill 9, s 27 (see s 2).
[10] Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Press Release, “Quebec’s Bill 9 Masks Discrimination as Secularism” (27 November 2025), online: https://ccla.org/press-release/quebecs-bill-9-masks-discrimination-as-secularism/: “The freedom to express one’s thoughts, opinions and beliefs in public, including through prayer, is a cornerstone of any democratic society.”; Benjamin Shingler, “Quebec’s new secularism bill targets daycare workers, prayer spaces and religious meals” CBC News (27 November 2025) online: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-secularism-bill-9.6993278.
[11] See, for example, Saumur v City of Québec, [1953] 2 SCR 299.
[12] Freedom of Worship Act, CQLR c L-2 [Freedom of Worship Act].
[13] Freedom of Worship Act, s 1.
[14] Bill 94, An Act to, in particular, reinforce laicity in the education network and to amend various legislative provisions, 1st Sess, 43rd Leg, Québec, 2025 (introduced by Bernard Drainville, Minister of Education), online: https://www.assnat.qc.ca/en/travaux-parlementaires/projets-loi/projet-loi-94-43-1.html [Bill 94].
[15] Bill 94, ss 10 and 18, Explanatory Notes. See also Philip Authier, “Quebec to strengthen secularism in schools amid Bill 94 debate”, Montreal Gazette (20 March 2025), online: https://www.montrealgazette.com/news/provincial-news/article827023.html [Bill 94 Montreal Gazette Article].
[16] AB c Procureur général du Québec, 2023 QCCA 999 [AB].
[17] See Christian Legal Fellowship, “Defending Students’ Right to Pray”, (27 July 2023), online (blog): https://www.christianlegalfellowship.org/blog/studentprayer.
[18] Bill 94, s 40 (see ss 706.2, 706.3). See Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s 33, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11.
[19] Bill 9, s 27 (see s 14).
[20] Bill 94, s 18 (see s. 101.1).
[21] Bill 9, s 9 (see s 10.2, which states an exception to the general prohibition set out in s. 10.1, except in a “school service centre”).
[22] Bill 94, s 39 (see s 479.2).
[23] Philip Authier, “Janitors, library volunteers, secretaries: New bill would extend Quebec’s ban on religious symbols in schools”, Montreal Gazette (March 21, 2025), online: https://www.montrealgazette.com/news/provincial-news/article827023.html#storylink=cpy.
[24] Bill 9, ss 21–22.
[25] Hak v. Procureur général du Québec, 2021 QCCS 1466, para 64; see also Organisation mondiale sikhe du Canada c. Procureur general du Québec, 2024 QCCA 254, para 99.
[26] Bill 94, s 40.1, Explanatory Notes.
[27] Bill 9, s 20 (see para 15).
[28] An Act respecting integration into the Québec nation, SQ 2025, c 13, ss 3, 5(4), 6(5)–(6).
[29] Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, RLRQ, c. C-12, preamble, s. 9.1.
[30] Bill 1, Québec Constitution Act, 2025, 2nd Sess, 43rd Leg, Quebec (first reading 9 October 2025) [Québec Constitution].
[31] Québec Constitution, Title 1 “Primacy of the Constitution”, cl 1–2.
[32] See Québec Constitution, Explanatory Notes, p 3.
[33] Québec Constitution, Part IV “Amendments to the Constitution Act, 1867”, cls 5, 10.
[34] Québec Constitution, Title 2 “Quebec Nation”, Ch 2 “Collective Rights”, cls 7, 8, 11.
[35] Québec Constitution, Part V “Other Amendments”, s 24.
[36] Québec Constitution, Part V “Other Amendments”, s 21.
[37] Québec, Comité d’étude sur le respect des principes de la Loi sur la laïcité de l’État et sur les influences religieuses, Pour une laïcité québécoise encore plus cohérente : bilan et perspectives, (August 2025), online: https://cdn-contenu.quebec.ca/cdn-contenu/adm/org/secretariat-institution-democratiques/laicite/rapport-comite/rapport_laicite-bilan-perspectives-2025.pdf.
[38] Mouvement laïque québécois v Saguenay (City), 2015 SCC 16, para 74, 133 [Saguenay]. This duty of state neutrality “flows from” (paras 23, 49, 51, 86) Charter protections for freedom of religion and conscience, but is not confined or exhausted by them, as it is ultimately “based on a democratic imperative” (para 75).
[39] Saguenay at paras 133, 74.
[40] See Christian Legal Fellowship, “CLF Intervenes After Government Denies Space for Faith Gathering Due to Disagreement with Religious Beliefs” (16 December 2024), online (blog): https://www.christianlegalfellowship.org/blog/hmiintervention.