The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is backing a legal challenge by Alberta lawyer Roger Song, who is taking the Law Society of Alberta to court over what he describes as the forced imposition of political ideology under the guise of legal competence and ethics.

Song's constitutional challenge will be heard at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, May 6, 2025, at the Court of King's Bench in Calgary. At the heart of the case is a set of Law Society rules that Song says force lawyers to adopt "woke" political views to remain in good standing.

Among the provisions being challenged, there is Rule 67.4, which enables the Society to mandate politicized training, not limited to Indigenous content, Rules 67.2 and 67.3, which compel lawyers to submit annual professional development plans tied to a "Professional Development Profile" that Song argues redefines competence as ideological conformity, and Part 6.3 of the Code of Professional Conduct, addressing harassment and discrimination, which Song says is used to stifle dissenting opinions and redefine legal ethics.

Song, who was a legal professor in Beijing before immigrating to Canada, likens the training to the political indoctrination he witnessed under Maoist rule. He became a member of the Alberta Bar in 2014 and was forced in 2019 to undergo "cultural competence" training to maintain his credentials. When his petition to allow lawyers to vote on ending mandatory professional development failed, he launched this constitutional challenge in 2023.

The Law Society has openly admitted in court filings that it is pursuing "political" and "ideological" objectives, but has refused to define those terms — and has argued that the courts have no authority to review whether those objectives are lawful.

Song argues the Society's vague mandates violate his Charter rights to freedom of conscience and expression under Sections 2(a) and 2(b), amounting to compelled speech and political indoctrination.

"The Law Society's actions threaten the foundations of the rule of law," Song stated.

Constitutional lawyer Glenn Blackett, who is representing Song, said the implications of the case are profound.

"The Law Society effectively seeks to change Canada’s law by changing the way lawyers work – by changing their 'culture.' In a democracy, the legislature makes and changes laws, not law societies, not law firms," Blackett said.

He added that the Law Society is effectively asking the court to "abdicate its duty" to ensure government bodies act within legal and constitutional bounds.

The Justice Centre says the case could set a national precedent on whether professional regulators can use licensing requirements to enforce ideological conformity.