Featured Image
The High Level Bridge in Edmonton.AnastasiaPhoto /

October 10, 2019 (Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms) — The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms ( has filed a court application on behalf of the Alberta March for Life Association (AMLA) and Jerry Pasternak against the City of Edmonton over its decision to cancel a scheduled lighting of the High Level Bridge in colours chosen by AMLA.

Operated by the City of Edmonton, the High Level Bridge is outfitted with 60,000 programmable lights, lit every day in the morning and evening. Through the “Light the Bridge” program, the City permits and invites members of the public and community groups to request the Bridge be lit in specific colours to reflect their event or cause.

On March 6, 2019, Jerry Pasternak, Vice Chair of AMLA, submitted an application to the City for the High Level Bridge to be lit up on May 9, 2019 in the colours of pink, blue, and white to recognize the March for Life. For over 10 years, thousands of supporters have participated in the annual peaceful outdoor march, organized by AMLA to recognize the dignity of the elderly and disabled people, as well as the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death.   

AMLA's application was approved by the City on March 7, 2019. However, on April 5, the City reneged and cancelled the scheduled lighting of the Bridge. In an email, City staff stated: “Upon further review of your application, it came to our attention that lighting the bridge for this event cannot be approved due to the polarizing nature of the subject matter.”

In response, Jerry Pasternak emailed City staff, stating: “I am deeply disappointed in your decision. Can you please provide evidence of this polarization?”

The City of Edmonton has not responded.

A nearly identical incident occurred May 7, 2017, when, on the day the Bridge was approved to be lit in the pink, blue and white colours associated with the March for Life, the City cancelled the lighting. No rationale or justification was provided by the City for the cancellation.

The Bridge is regularly lit in association with various religious and political causes, awareness days, religious celebrations, political holidays and commemorations that promote the ideologies, political causes and religious beliefs of their proponents. For example, within the last three years, the Bridge has repeatedly been lit to promote sexual and gender diversity, Pride, various Islamic holidays and commemorations, Jewish religious holidays, Buddhist religious holidays, days recognizing political events in foreign countries such as Chilean Independence Day and the anniversary of the founding of Azerbaijan, and awareness days such as National Day of Remembrance for Victims of Terrorism, and Wrongful Conviction Day. Ironically recognizing beliefs and causes that are similar to the Alberta March for Life Association, the Bridge has recently been lit in association with International Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Day, and various disability awareness campaigns.

As outlined in the Justice Centre's court application, the City is constitutionally prohibited from discriminating against the content of expression in spaces it has opened up to the public for expressive purposes. In twice deciding to cancel a scheduled lighting of the Bridge, exclusively because of the pro-life expression involved, the City has twice failed to explain how such expression is “polarizing”, or whether it is more “polarizing” than other causes, or how the City determines which organizations or issues are sufficiently “polarizing” to warrant being denied the right to use a public space that is available to a long list of other causes.

“The City of Edmonton is home to a diverse population with a wide variety of views, values and beliefs including, unsurprisingly, persons who express pro-life views. As a government that is constitutionally obligated to be neutral regarding the expression of its citizens, it is not the proper role of the City to elevate and promote the favoured ideological causes of some citizens to the exclusion of the lawful views of others,” stated Justice Centre staff lawyer James Kitchen.

“The City ought to cease permitting citizens to use the High Level Bridge lighting system to promote their pet causes, as the City of Prince Albert did with its community flagpole” continued Kitchen. “However, if the City chooses to continue with this practice, it must cease arbitrarily playing favourites with who can have the bridge lit up in colours representing a particular political cause, ideology, or religion.”

Published with permission from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms.


Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.