Real reason for prorogation: Trudeau was cornered

Government lawyers “flailing like fish on dry land“

by Dan Knight

Reprinted with special permission

Well, folks, here we are. Day two of the Federal Court showdown, where the Trudeau government is desperately trying to convince Canadians that shutting down Parliament to protect their own hide was a completely reasonable thing to do. They want you to believe that this is all perfectly normal, that it’s routine, that it’s just a quirk of the system. Nothing to see here, folks!

But the problem with lying is that eventually, you get caught. And on Day 2 of this hearing, Justin Trudeau’s legal team got caught. Over and over again.

If you watched what unfolded in court, you saw the Trudeau government’s lawyers flailing like fish on dry land, fumbling through weak excuses as Chief Justice Paul S. Crampton shredded their arguments one by one. At one point, they actually misrepresented a legal precedent in court, only for the Chief Justice to read the case aloud and reveal that it actually contradicted their argument. Humiliating.

And that was just the start.

This case isn’t just about whether Trudeau technically had the ability to prorogue Parliament. It’s about why he did it—and more importantly, whether Canada is now a country where the Prime Minister can shut down democracy whenever it gets inconvenient for him. Because if the courts let this stand, what’s stopping the next Prime Minister from proroguing indefinitely? What’s stopping the government from suspending Parliament every time there’s a corruption scandal, every time they fear a non-confidence vote, every time they need to cover up a mess of their own making?

And that’s exactly what Trudeau did. His government was facing multiple crises all at once—a massive financial scandal, a looming non-confidence vote, and an economic firestorm caused by Trump’s tariff threats. So rather than actually dealing with it, he shut Parliament down. The question is: Did he have the right to do that?

Trudeau’s Legal Team Has One Argument: “The Court Can’t Stop Us”

The Trudeau government’s lawyers had one job today—convince the court that prorogation is beyond judicial review. That was it. That was their entire strategy. Not that it was necessary. Not that it was ethical. Just that there’s nothing the court can do about it.

They started by arguing that Justin Trudeau isn’t responsible for prorogation at all. No, they said, it was actually the Governor General who did it. That’s right—the Trudeau government is now claiming that the Prime Minister of Canada, the man who publicly announced on January 6 that he had decided to prorogue Parliament, wasn’t actually responsible for proroguing Parliament.

Naturally, Chief Justice Crampton wasn’t buying it. He pointed out that no Governor General in Canadian history has ever refused a Prime Minister’s request for prorogation. That’s right—never. The Governor General is not some independent actor who just wakes up one morning and decides, You know what? Let’s shut Parliament down for a couple of months. That’s not how this works. The Prime Minister advises it, and the Governor General rubber-stamps it.

So why is Trudeau’s government suddenly pretending like he had nothing to do with it? Simple. Because if they can convince the court that this was the Governor General’s decision, then the case gets thrown out.

But that’s just the beginning of the absurdity. Trudeau’s legal team then went on to argue that there are no legal limits on prorogation whatsoever. That’s right—none. According to them, the Prime Minister could prorogue Parliament indefinitely, and there’s not a thing the courts or anyone else could do about it.

The Chief Justice was visibly skeptical, and for good reason. If prorogation has no limits, then Canada is no longer a parliamentary democracy—it’s an elected dictatorship.

At one point, Crampton asked them how Parliament is supposed to hold the government accountable if it’s shut down. The response from Trudeau’s lawyers?

Well, Parliament can hold the government accountable when it returns.

Yes, you read that right. The government’s actual defense is that Parliament can hold them accountable later. Which, of course, is exactly the point. Because what happens if they just prorogue again? And again? And again? The court kept pressing, but the government had no answer.

JCCF Lays Out the Real Reason for Prorogation: Trudeau Was Cornered

Now, let’s talk about what Trudeau’s government was really trying to avoid. Because while his lawyers were playing legal word games, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms was laying out the cold, hard truth.

Trudeau shut down Parliament because his government was about to be exposed on multiple fronts.

First, there was the Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC) scandal. Millions of dollars had mysteriously gone missing from a government-controlled green technology fund, and the Auditor General had uncovered serious financial mismanagement. Parliamentary committees were demanding answers, and Trudeau’s government was stalling. So what did they do? They shut Parliament down.

Then, there was the looming non-confidence vote. Opposition parties had been publicly discussing bringing down Trudeau’s minority government. Conservative MP John Williamson, Chair of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, had even put it in writing. If the vote happened, Trudeau could have lost power. So what did he do? He shut Parliament down.

And let’s not forget the economic mess with the United States. Donald Trump had announced plans for 25 percent tariffs on Canadian goods. Trudeau’s government was scrambling to come up with a response, but there was one major problem: any new spending to deal with the crisis would require parliamentary approval. But Parliament wasn’t sitting anymore. Because Trudeau shut it down.

The JCCF laid all of this out in court, showing that Trudeau didn’t prorogue Parliament for the good of Canadians—he did it to protect himself. And the Chief Justice seemed to take their arguments seriously.

What Happens Next?

The Chief Justice has promised to issue a ruling before Parliament resumes on March 24. That means this case will be decided before Trudeau can walk away and pretend none of this ever happened.

If the court rules against the government, it will mean that future Prime Ministers cannot abuse prorogation to avoid scrutiny. It will send a clear message that shutting down Parliament to protect yourself is unconstitutional and illegal.

But if the government wins, it will mean that the Prime Minister can shut down democracy anytime he wants. It will mean that Canada is no longer a functioning parliamentary system but a country where the executive can do whatever it pleases.

And if that happens, ask yourself this: What’s stopping the next Prime Minister from just shutting down Parliament indefinitely?

Trudeau might be stepping down soon, but his legacy of corruption, incompetence, and political cowardice will haunt this country for years. The question now is whether the courts will allow him to rewrite the rules of democracy on his way out the door.

We’ll find out soon.

*****

Dan Knight is a trusted Canadian journalist, exposing corruption, delivering unfiltered truths, and untold stories. Join him on Substack for the unfiltered truth.