The Supreme Court docket of Canada has began listening to a case about whether or not it’s constitutional for police to make random site visitors stops with out cheap suspicion the driving force has dedicated an offence.
The case includes Joseph-Christopher Luamba, a Montrealer of Haitian descent who mentioned he was repeatedly stopped by police for no obvious cause when he was driving or driving in automobiles. Not one of the stops resulted in a ticket.
Get each day Nationwide information
Get the day’s prime information, political, financial, and present affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox as soon as a day.
Quebec’s Superior Court docket declared the regulation on random site visitors stops inoperative in 2022 on the grounds it led to racial profiling, and the Court docket of Attraction upheld the ruling in 2024.
A lawyer for the Quebec authorities argued Monday that the lower-court selections deprive police of an necessary instrument to implement street security guidelines.
However Luamba’s lawyer informed Canada’s highest court docket that police stops aren’t really random — he mentioned they’re “arbitrary” and disproportionately have an effect on Black drivers and violate their rights.
The Supreme Court docket is being requested to weigh in on whether or not stopping drivers with no obvious cause violates the Constitution, and whether or not the Quebec judges made an error once they invalidated a 1990 Supreme Court docket determination that upheld the follow of random stops.
This report by The Canadian Press was first printed Jan. 19, 2026.
© 2026 The Canadian Press
