A new Leger poll reveals that Liberal voters are more likely to support the use of the notwithstanding clause than Conservative voters, despite the Carney government's recent legal challenge seeking to restrict its application. The survey, conducted in early 2026, found that 51 percent of Liberal respondents strongly or somewhat supported invoking Section 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, while only 33 percent opposed it. In contrast, 39 percent of Conservative voters backed the clause, with 45 percent against. Sixteen percent of both groups were undecided.
Surprising findings amid government stance
Andrew Enns, executive vice-president of Leger's Central Canada operations, expressed surprise at the results, given that the Liberal government led by Prime Minister Carney submitted a written document to the Supreme Court last fall urging limits on the clause. The submission argued that the temporary nature of Section 33 'confirms that it cannot be used to cause an irreparable impairment of the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Charter' and that courts must retain jurisdiction to review its use case by case.
'I think of the most recent times that the clause has been talked about and even used was with respect to minority rights, transgender rights in this case,' Enns said. 'And Justin Trudeau, when he was prime minister, he wasn't pleased with that. And so I was kind of surprised that Liberal voters would have still been more supportive of using the notwithstanding clause.'
Familiarity and pre-emptive use
The poll also indicated that Liberal voters are more familiar with the clause, with 48 percent reporting some awareness compared to 38 percent of Conservatives. However, support for pre-emptive use of the clause—where governments invoke it before a court challenge—was lower overall. The clause allows legislatures to pass laws that may violate Charter rights, shielding them from judicial review for up to five years.
Context of the Supreme Court challenge
The notwithstanding clause is currently under scrutiny by the Supreme Court of Canada as part of a challenge to Quebec's Bill 21, which bans public-sector workers from wearing religious symbols. Quebec first invoked the clause pre-emptively in 2019 for Bill 21 and again in 2021 for language law reforms restricting English use. The province renewed the legislation in 2024, prompting a review. After two lower court rulings upheld the law, the Supreme Court heard the case over four days in March 2026—the longest hearing in its history.
In 2022, then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau criticized pre-emptive use of the clause, stating that 'Canadians themselves should be extremely worried about the increased commonality of provincial governments using the notwithstanding clause pre-emptively to suspend their fundamental rights and freedoms.' Despite this, the Leger data shows that Liberal voters remain more supportive of the clause overall, a paradox that Enns attributes to evolving political messaging and public understanding.
