Supreme Court Delivers Landmark Ruling on Mobility Rights During Pandemic
In a unanimous decision that will shape constitutional law for generations, the Supreme Court of Canada has firmly rejected narrow interpretations of mobility rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The case, Taylor v. Newfoundland and Labrador, represents the Court's first major ruling addressing COVID-era restrictions and establishes crucial protections for Canadians' right to move freely within their own country.
The Case That Challenged Internal Borders
The legal battle began in May 2020 when Newfoundland and Labrador implemented sweeping public health orders that barred Nova Scotia resident Kim Taylor from entering the province to attend her mother's funeral. Although Taylor eventually received an exemption, she challenged the travel ban with support from the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, arguing it violated her mobility rights under section 6 of the Charter.
The provincial government had taken the extraordinary position that the Charter contained no general right to move freely within Canada, claiming constitutional protection only applied to those permanently relocating or working in another province. This interpretation would have effectively allowed provinces to create internal borders during emergencies without constitutional constraint.
Section 6: A Constitutional Guarantee Rediscovered
Section 6 of the Charter has been one of the least litigated provisions since its enactment in 1982. The section contains two distinct guarantees: the right to enter, remain in, and leave Canada (section 6(1)), and the right to move to, take up residence in, and work in any province (section 6(2)).
The central question before the Court was whether these provisions protected something broader than their literal wording suggested—a general right of "mobility simpliciter" that would allow Canadians to move about the country without requiring government permission for temporary travel.
"Given the sparse case law on section 6, there was a real risk the Court could have adopted a narrow interpretation that hollowed out mobility rights for generations," noted constitutional experts following the case.
A Unanimous Decision with Far-Reaching Implications
The majority decision, written by Justices Andromache Karakatsanis and Sheilah Martin and joined by two other justices, firmly established that section 6 does indeed include the broad right to mobility simpliciter. The Court emphasized that this right exists in both sections 6(1) and 6(2) of the Charter.
The ruling traced freedom of movement to deep roots in Anglo-Canadian legal tradition, noting that even in the 13th century it was regarded as an ancient custom. The Charter didn't invent mobility rights but rather constitutionalized them, serving what the Court described as a "nation-building purpose."
The decision explained that section 6 promotes national unity and reinforces the fundamental idea that Canadians belong to one country, not thirteen separate jurisdictions guarded by internal borders. The Court cited legislative debates provided by the Canadian Constitution Foundation, which had intervened in the case to argue for broad protections for the right to travel within Canada.
Why This Ruling Matters Beyond the Pandemic
While the Taylor case specifically addressed COVID-19 travel restrictions, its implications extend far beyond pandemic response measures. The decision:
- Establishes clear constitutional limits on provincial authority to restrict interprovincial movement
- Reinforces the principle of national unity against provincial fragmentation
- Provides stronger legal footing for challenging future restrictions on internal travel
- Clarifies that mobility rights aren't limited to permanent relocation or employment
The ruling represents a significant victory for civil liberties advocates who had warned that accepting Newfoundland's narrow interpretation would have created dangerous precedent for future emergencies. By unanimously affirming broad mobility rights, the Supreme Court has ensured that Canadians' freedom to move within their country remains protected even during times of crisis.
