Quebec extends its face-covering rules to schoolchildren
Bill 21 (2019) barred public workers from wearing religious symbols on the job. Bill 94, adopted in October 2025, requires students to uncover their faces at school. Both invoke the notwithstanding clause; the Supreme Court heard Bill 21's constitutional challenge in March 2026 and has not yet ruled.
Quebec's secularism laws are unusual among the restrictions covered here: they are not framed around public space generally, but around specific institutions: first the public service, now schools. And they sit on top of an older, separate dispute about a federal ceremony that has nothing to do with Quebec.
Before Bill 21: a federal dispute over the citizenship oath
In 2011, federal immigration minister Jason Kenney unilaterally barred face coverings during the citizenship oath, arguing the niqab was incompatible with taking the oath "openly." Zunera Ishaq, a permanent resident who wished to take the oath in niqab, challenged the policy. The Federal Court ruled against the government on 6 February 2015, and the Federal Court of Appeal upheld that ruling that September. The Liberal government, elected weeks later, dropped the appeal; Ishaq took her citizenship oath in niqab in October 2015. That dispute was federal and procedural, about a manual instruction to citizenship judges, not a statute, and is separate from everything below, which is Quebec provincial law.
Bill 21 — where it started
Passed into law on 16 June 2019, An Act Respecting the Laicity of the State bars public-sector workers in certain roles — teachers, judges, police — from wearing religious symbols on the job, including the hijab, niqab, turban and kippah.
Bill 94 — the extension, now in force
Quebec's National Assembly adopted Bill 94, An Act to reinforce laicity in the education network, on 30 October 2025. It extends the religious-symbols ban to school support staff, contractors and parent volunteers, and requires students, the part specific to this site, to have their faces uncovered on school premises. A student wearing a full face veil is barred from attending in it. Staff already employed as of 19 March 2025 may keep what they wear as long as they stay in the same position; a change of role or a new hire falls under the ban.
The notwithstanding clause
Both bills invoke section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the notwithstanding clause, which lets a provincial legislature override certain Charter rights for renewable five-year periods, pre-emptively rather than in response to a court loss. This is what has kept Bill 21 standing despite ongoing constitutional challenges: courts cannot strike it down on the grounds the clause suspends.
The Supreme Court of Canada heard a four-day hearing on Bill 21's constitutionality in March 2026, in a case now styled English Montreal School Board v. Attorney General of Québec (formerly Hak v. Attorney General of Quebec). The Court has reserved its decision; as of this note's last verification, no ruling has been released.
What is documented so far
A National Council of Canadian Muslims survey of 411 Muslim women in Quebec found more than half reported experiencing racist or Islamophobic harassment at work since Bill 21 took effect. That is one of the few pieces of data available on the law's practical effect rather than its legal status.
Sources. CBC News — Bill 94 · The CJN — Bill 94 adoption · Canadian Civil Liberties Association — Bill 21 · LEAF — case summary and Supreme Court hearing · Goldblatt Partners — Ishaq Federal Court of Appeal ruling · The Conversation
The Supreme Court's ruling on Bill 21 was still pending as of the sources above; check whether it has been released before citing this note's status as current.