Cycling advocates are looking to escalate the legal battle over bike lanes on three major Toronto streets, asking the Supreme Court of Canada to take on the Ford government’s years-long effort to tear them out.
In a mid-August ruling, the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned a lower court’s decision that removing bike lanes violated the Canadian Charter, allowing the government to proceed with its plan.
The decision reactivated a policy that the Ford government first put in place at the end of 2024 to restore space for vehicles — and remove bike lanes — from portions of Bloor Street West, Yonge Street and University Avenue.
On Tuesday, the government said it would begin that work by reverting a 600-metre section of Bloor to vehicle-only lanes.
Ahead of the removal, CycleTO and EcoJustice, two groups that launched the charter challenge, revealed they are appealing the case to Canada’s highest court asking it to strike down the policy as unconstitutional and weigh in on the government’s ability to implement potentially life-threatening legislation.
“The consequences of this case reach far beyond bike lanes and beyond Ontario,” said Bronwyn Roe with Ecojustice.
Get daily National news
“We are asking the Supreme Court to hear this case in order to provide clarity about the scope of the rights to life and security of the person protected by Section 7 of the Charter.”
In response to the groups appealing to the Supreme Court, Transportation Minister Prabmeet Sarkaria’s office told Global News that the August ruling in their favour was “clear” and as a result the government is removing the bike lanes on Bloor Street West beginning Tuesday.
In the August ruling that paved the way for the lanes’ removal, Justice Grant Huscroft took issue with the lower court allegedly meddling in the business of the legislature.
Huscroft wrote “it is illegitimate for courts to involve themselves in matters of legislative policy.”
While Minister Sarkaria said the ruling underscored the government’s “clear and direct mandate” to fight gridlock, advocates argue their substantive arguments still apply.
“The Ontario Court of Appeal found that, as a matter of law, removing protected bike lanes could not infringe the Charter if there was no positive right to the bike lanes in the first place. The court did not consider, let alone overturn, the superior court’s factual findings,” Roe said.
Michael Longfield, the executive director of Cycle Toronto said their principal arguments will be reintroduced in front of the supreme court, if the case is heard.
“Bike lanes do not cause traffic congestion, ripping them out will put people’s lives at risk, there’s no network of side streets that can replace the bike lanes that are here,” Longfield said.
The Supreme Court of Canada will only hear an appeal if the case “raises a question of public importance,” the court states on its website.
According to the Court, a case that meets that bar for appeal could include one that involves the interpretation of constitutional rights, or if it raises a new issue of law or if it requires the Court to resolve conflicting decisions from courts of appeal.
Ontario NDP Leader Marit Stiles told reporters Tuesday that CycleTO should “do what they need to do” and lambasted Ford for “wasting money” by ripping up Toronto’s bike lanes. She accused the premier of having an “obsession” with the city’s cyclists instead of focusing on the province’s fledgling healthcare system.
“We should have never gotten to this place,” said Stiles. “It’s absolutely absurd. It’s also government overreach,” she said.
More lawfare from the pious greenie progressives. What else is new?
Goodbye bike lanes. And to all the “Karens” who ride bicycles in live traffic, causing havoc, take the TTC ya losers !
I don’t see what the difference is. Cyclists rarely use the lane as intended anyways. I had some guy in the middle of a stretch of road decide he wanted to be on the other side. No hand signals, just a 90 degree turn ffrom a stopped positikn and crossed in front of me. I almost hit him because he wasn’t concerned with traffic around him.
“Traffic isn’t going to change with their removal. The studies under Ford already prove this.”
There was no such conclusion.
You can look at earlier articles where the studies were part of the court case. Information that Ford suppressed but had to open during discovery.
Derp derp
Derp derp. I spend my days on Reddit and CBC preaching to others.
“Bikes and people walking existed before paved roads for cars. Bike lanes are not changing the road conditions”
Bikes are not in the same category as people walking. That is your critical mistake. They are vehicles. And yes they belong on the road next to other vehicles the way things used to “exist”. We are not special. We don’t need our own infrastructure. We can stop at stop signs, obey the flow of one-way traffic, and yield to pedestrians. If you can’t, then you have no business being on a bike.
And please name these studies you are referring to.
Bikes and people walking existed before paved roads for cars. Bike lanes are not changing the road conditions. Traffic isn’t going to change with their removal. The studies under Ford already prove this. But thanks for telling people that want bike lanes that their money from taxes aren’t going to services that they would want.
“They pay taxes like everyone else. Why can’t their tax money that goes to the city. Be used for services that they would use”
Roads already exist. Use them like we used to do to get around on bikes.
But, but, it’s my right under The Charter of Rights and Freedoms to blow stop signs and red lights downtown….aww come on…the party is over? Well my 100 fellow bike riders friends and I are all going to be angry…..does anybody care?
Goodbye bike lanes…no tears for the losers on bicycles who ride around downtown with no concern for pedestrians, or rules of the road such as red lights and stop signs. It was a mistake putting in bike lanes but that mistake can be corrected.
They pay taxes like everyone else. Why can’t their tax money that goes to the city. Be used for services that they would use. How is that an issue? Oh right. People shouldn’t be helped with their tax money.
RIP THEM UP !!!!!
IF BIKERS HAD ANY BRAINS THEY WOULD USE THE SIDE STREETS!!!!!!
SINCE CHOW’S TRAFFIC CZAR HAS DONE NOTHING (WITH A HUGE PAY CHEQUE) IT IS TIME FOR THE PROVINCE TO DO SOMETHING!!!!!!
Anonymous at 2:40 pm, when we cyclists start paying for insurance and registration then maybe you have an argument.
Taxpayers should not be on the hook because these fools refuse to learn how to ride their bikes
Apparently right to safety is not in the constitution from the below people’s minds. How strange, if accidents from cars go up or have decreased from bike lanes. Only insurance benefits from ripping them out. Not the injured.
Supreme Court won’t hear it. There has been only one appeal and one Court of Appeal rendering a decision. There’s no new law involved, and it’s hardly a matter of “constitutional rights.”
Rip them up!
We can cycle amongst other vehicles like we always have. Those of us who grew up in the 80s remember Metro Police (as they were called then) coming into schools and teaching kids safe cycling skills. We ended up fine.
Wrong-speak. They are not vehicle only lanes. They are multi-use lanes. The only lanes that are ‘only’ lanes are the bike lanes.
How confused can one get… there is no constitutional right to have bike lanes. And stats show bike lanes cause more bicycle accidents than multi-use lanes. Hopefully this will not even be heard, as the Supreme Court of Ontario settled it correctly.