Trudeau’s Prorogation Faces a Legal Showdown

JCCF argues Trudeau shut down Parliament to dodge scandals and a confidence vote, while Trudeaus lawyers admit prorogation is a political tool with “no limits.”

Trudeau’s Prorogation Faces a Legal Showdown: The Battle for Parliamentary Accountability

Something remarkable is happening in Canada right now. For the first time in history, a Prime Minister’s use of prorogation is being challenged in Federal Court. And why? Because Justin Trudeau shut down Parliament—not for governance, not because it wasn’t functioning, but because he was cornered.

On January 6, Trudeau stood before Canadians and admitted that he personally advised the Governor General to suspend Parliament. His excuse? A “reset.” The real reason? He was facing a non-confidence vote, a corruption scandal, and a looming trade war with Donald Trump—all at the same time. So what did he do? He pulled the plug on democracy.

Now, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) has taken him to court, representing two applicants—David MacKinnon and Aris Lavranos—who are challenging the constitutionality of Trudeau’s prorogation. Their argument is simple: Trudeau didn’t shut down Parliament for the benefit of Canadians—he did it to save himself. And now, the Federal Court has the chance to decide whether a Prime Minister can suspend Parliament whenever it becomes politically inconvenient.

This case isn’t just about Trudeau. It’s about whether the courts will allow any Prime Minister to abuse prorogation as a way to escape accountability. And if Trudeau gets away with it this time, who’s to say the next Prime Minister won’t shut down Parliament indefinitely?

JCCF’s Case: Trudeau’s Excuses Fall Apart

JCCF’s legal team, led by James Manson, Darren Leung, and Andre Memauri, has gone on the offensive, systematically tearing apart Trudeau’s justification for prorogation.

First, they dismantled his claim that Parliament was “dysfunctional.” Trudeau told Canadians that Parliament had become gridlocked and unworkable, but the facts say otherwise. Four bills passed in the weeks leading up to his decision. That’s not dysfunction—that’s Parliament doing its job. If things were truly at a standstill, wouldn’t we have seen constant deadlocks, failures to pass legislation, and total chaos? We didn’t. Instead, we saw a functioning legislative body that Trudeau abruptly shut down.

Second, they exposed his real motivation: avoiding scrutiny over the SDTC scandal. The Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC) scandal had taken over Parliament. The Auditor General found major financial mismanagement, millions in missing funds, and clear evidence of corruption. Opposition MPs were demanding documents, and Trudeau’s government was stalling. The walls were closing in. And then—suddenly, Parliament was shut down. Coincidence? Hardly.

Third, JCCF revealed that Trudeau was about to face a confidence vote. Conservative MP John Williamson had already written to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, outlining the opposition’s plan to introduce a non-confidence motion on January 27, 2025. Had it gone forward, Trudeau could have lost power. But by proroguing Parliament, he prevented MPs from voting on whether his government should continue to exist. In other words, he didn’t just run from accountability—he rigged the system to stay in power.

Fourth, they pointed out that Trudeau’s decision actually weakened Canada in the face of Trump’s economic threats. The Trudeau government announced new funding for border security in response to Trump’s threats of 25% tariffs on Canadian goods. There’s just one problem—that funding requires parliamentary approval. But Parliament isn’t sitting. So how exactly does Trudeau plan to secure Canada’s economy when his government doesn’t even have the legal authority to approve spending?

Trudeau’s Legal Team Struggles to Defend His Decision

If you thought Trudeau’s lawyers would have a solid defense, think again. Their argument in court has been nothing short of disastrous, filled with contradictions, evasions, and an outright admission that should concern every Canadian.

From the outset, they struggled to justify why Parliament was shut down, while simultaneously trying to delay the case itself. The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) had requested an expedited hearing to resolve the matter before Parliament resumes on March 24, 2025. The Trudeau government’s legal team pushed back, arguing they needed more time to prepare. The court ultimately granted a one-day extension, but the attempt to stall was clear. If the government could delay the case long enough, it could render the entire legal challenge moot.

Then came their actual defense in court, and it was nothing short of a disaster. Trudeau’s lawyer stood up and opened their argument by admitting prorogation is a political tool. Not a governance tool. Not a necessary function of democracy. A political tool. The exact quote? “Chief Justice, as you know, prorogation is a valuable political tool.”

There it is—straight from the Trudeau government. They don’t see prorogation as a way to responsibly reset Parliament. They see it as a weapon to be used whenever things get uncomfortable for them.

Then, in an attempt to argue that Trudeau had the right to shut Parliament down, his own lawyer contradicted Trudeau’s justification entirely. She argued that bills were still passing through Parliament in the weeks leading up to prorogation, despite the SDTC scandal.

That’s an interesting argument, because it completely undermines Trudeau’s own justification for shutting down Parliament. If Parliament was so dysfunctional, as Trudeau claimed, how was it still passing legislation?

Chief Justice Paul S. Crampton noticed the contradiction immediately. He directly asked the government’s lawyer: “So your position is that the government was functioning?”

What was her response? “I don’t have a position.”

You can’t make this up. Trudeau’s own lawyer couldn’t even decide whether Parliament was functioning or not—because to answer truthfully would mean exposing Trudeau’s lie.

And then, the most shocking moment of all. The Chief Justice asked a simple but crucial question:

“Could a government use prorogation to avoid a confidence motion?”

The Trudeau lawyer’s response? “There are no limits on prorogation.”

That’s right. Trudeau’s government just argued in court that a Prime Minister can shut down Parliament whenever they want, for as long as they want, for whatever reason they want.

This isn’t just about Trudeau—it’s about the fundamental balance of power in Canadian democracy. If the court accepts this argument, it will mean that future Prime Ministers can suspend Parliament indefinitely to avoid accountability.

That’s not democracy. That’s dictatorship.

The Case Continues Today: JCCF Asks—Can Trudeau Just Prorogue Parliament Whenever It Suits Him?

Justin Trudeau, in his final act as Prime Minister, tried to rewrite history—to spin his scandal-plagued government’s collapse as a noble “reset” rather than what it really was: a desperate, calculated escape. And instead of taking responsibility—like an adult, like a leader—he did what weak, entitled politicians always do when backed into a corner: he ran. But he didn’t just run from reporters or dodge a press conference—he shut down Parliament. The entire governing body of Canada. And now, for the first time in this country’s history, a Prime Minister is being dragged into court to answer for it.

Think about that. The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) is now in Federal Court arguing that Trudeau abused his power when he advised the Governor General to prorogue Parliament. And why? Because he was about to lose. He was facing a confidence vote. He was neck-deep in a financial scandal. Donald Trump was breathing down his neck with trade threats. So instead of dealing with the fallout like a responsible head of government, Trudeau pressed pause on democracy and just walked away.

But of course, the arrogance of this government isn’t just limited to their abuse of power. No, that would almost be forgivable compared to what they did next. Because right before Trudeau walked out the door, his government dropped a $65 billion deficit on Canadians. Sixty-five billion dollars. On the last day of a sitting government. The same government that lectured Canadians about "fiscal responsibility" and "building a strong middle class" casually left behind one of the largest budget shortfalls in modern history—and then disappeared. But sure, they really needed a reset. (Eye roll.)

And let’s not forget what else happened this week. You remember ArriveCAN, the infamous $60 million travel app boondoggle that somehow cost more than most Silicon Valley startups? Well, turns out the contractors who raked in millions from this government, who submitted that they were Indigenous to qualify for exclusive contracts, weren’t even Indigenous. So, not only did Trudeau’s government waste a fortune on a glorified QR code, they handed the contract to a company that lied about being Indigenous to secure it. But don’t worry, Trudeau’s team is all about reconciliation. (Eye roll.)

And then, of course, there’s the Hogue Inquiry—the bombshell foreign interference investigation that this government knew was coming. They knew it would expose how they failed to protect Canada’s democracy, how Beijing and other foreign actors had meddled in our elections while Trudeau looked the other way. And Parliament? Parliament would have been in session when this damning report dropped. Trudeau would have been forced to answer for it in front of the entire country. So what did he do? He shut it all down. This government didn’t want a reset. They wanted to surf over the news cycle.

This isn’t leadership. This is a scandal-ridden government trying to avoid accountability by any means necessary. Trudeau’s resignation wasn’t an act of humility—it was a calculated escape. He burned through billions, ignored warnings about foreign influence, and let the country’s economy spiral into chaos. And now, he wants to leave someone else holding the bag while he exits stage left.

And yet, somehow, his defenders in the media are still pretending this was about "restoring order" to a "dysfunctional Parliament." Give me a break. If this was really about a reset, why did they drop a record-breaking deficit on the way out the door? Why did they let fake Indigenous contractors walk away with millions in taxpayer money? Trudeau shuts down Parliament, and suddenly the Hogue Inquiry’s final report drops? Did they prorogue just to avoid answering for it? They knew it was coming, they knew it would be bad, so did they make sure Parliament wouldn’t be there to respond?

No, this wasn’t about a reset. This was about survival. And unless the courts step in, unless Trudeau’s legal team is actually held to account, this will be the new normal. Every Prime Minister who gets caught in a scandal, who faces a tough confidence vote, who can’t handle an economic crisis, will look at this and think: “Why not just shut it all down?” And if that happens, Canada will no longer be a democracy—it will be a country where the people in charge get to decide when the rules apply to them and when they don’t.

The case continues today. And let’s be honest—things aren’t looking great for Team Trudeau. His government has argued itself into a corner, admitting that prorogation is a political tool, contradicting their own justification, and essentially saying the Prime Minister can do whatever he wants. If that sounds like the kind of argument a banana republic would make, that’s because it is.

So what happens next? The Federal Court will decide:

• Can the Prime Minister’s decision to prorogue Parliament be reviewed by the courts?

• Did Trudeau use prorogation to escape accountability?

• Should there be legal limits on how and when a Prime Minister can suspend Parliament?

If the ruling favors JCCF, it will set a legal precedent preventing future Prime Ministers from using prorogation as a tool to escape accountability. If the court sides with Trudeau, it will grant future leaders the unchecked power to suspend Parliament whenever it benefits them politically.

This ruling is not just about Trudeau. It’s about the future of Canada’s democracy. If this kind of political maneuvering is allowed to stand, what’s stopping the next Prime Minister from shutting down Parliament indefinitely?

So stay tuned, because today’s hearing could decide whether Canada remains a parliamentary democracy—or just another country where the leader can hit pause on democracy whenever it suits them.