Frances Widdowson attended a protest at the University of Lethbridge on Feb. 1, 2023, after her speaking engagement was cancelled by the university. (Photo: Lethbridge News Now)

By David Opinko

Appeal dismissed after U of L cancelled guest speaker Frances Widdowson

Sep 23, 2025 | 3:26 PM

The Alberta Court of Appeal has made its ruling after a guest speaker said she was silenced by the University of Lethbridge.

Frances Widdowson was set to give a speech at the university on Feb. 1, 2023, entitled, “How Does Woke-ism Threaten Academic Freedom?”

The lecture presented a challenge to the political ideology of “woke-ness,” which Widdowson believes has led to an increased frequency and intensity of censorship.

According to documents from the courts, Widdowson “intended to say that woke ideology is hostile to free speech, open inquiry and dissent, leading to ostracization and censorship. She was to say that the purpose of an academic university is to promote rational disputation, even where that is “uncomfortable or politically incorrect”. She intended to say that woke-ness directly challenges the rational disputation model of a university, creates a chilling effect on campuses with accusations of racism, colonialism, sexism, transphobia and other forms of bigotry, and supresses “open debate and free expression.”

The knowledge of her scheduled lecture brought immediate reactions from some faculty and students and the U of L, who called her a “well-known residential school denialist” and a “white supremacist.”

Nighttime construction on Hwy 3 in Lethbridge starts April 17

Apr 17, 2025

SASHA launches #BuyABed fundraiser to support vulnerable Lethbridge residents

Apr 04, 2025

$20K grants available: TELUS STORYHIVE Pan-Asian Edition opens applications April 1

Mar 18, 2025

The U of L ended up cancelling Widdowson’s speaking engagement, as then-President and Chancellor Dr. Mike Mahon, said that her “views are in conflict with a number of the values held by the University.”

“It is clear that the harm associated with this talk is an impediment to meaningful reconciliation,” McMahon stated in 2023.

A protest at the university saw hundreds of people show their opposition and support to Widdowson and her message. Widdowson was in attendance and ended up giving her speech virtually.

READ MORE: University of Lethbridge cancels event featuring controversial speaker

READ MORE: Hundreds protest controversial speaker Frances Widdowson at University of Lethbridge

Widdowson and then-undergraduate student Jonah Pickle, who invited Widdowson to speak, launched a lawsuit against the University. They claimed that the post-secondary school had breached their freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as well as freedom of peaceful assembly under the Constitution Act.

READ MORE: University of Lethbridge cancels event featuring controversial speaker

The University argued that it cancelled the speaking engagement due to the potential for physical and psychological harm that could be inflicted on communities such as Indigenous people, LGBTQIA2S+, and other minorities.

Representatives for the U of L stated they are obligated under provisions of the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) to ensure that “the event and its impacts on employees and others in its vicinity was safe.”

The provisions cited refer to harassment and violence (including physical and psychological injury or harm), and say that institutions must look after the well-being of their workers.

Widdowson and Pickle sought to challenge the constitutionality of certain words and phrases in the OHSA legislation, such as harassment, psychological and violence.

They argued that if the university was obligated to cancel the lecture based on these provisions, then the OHSA violated their freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, and is therefore unconstitutional.

The judge said that he could not sign the requested order without a full review of the proposed constitutional amendments and the OHSA. He concluded that the addition of a constitutional challenge to the provisions of the OHSA “changes the fundamental nature of this proceeding, makes it bigger, more complicated and unnecessarily so.”

Widdowson and Pickle launched an appeal of the judge’s conclusion, alleging that he made a series of errors.

The Appeals Court says that, while the OHSA requires employers to look after the health, safety and welfare of their employees, it does not specify how they must accomplish that. The Appeals Court also stated that the judge did not make their decision based on an error in law.

“The chambers judge properly identified the applicable test. There is no error in law or principle, nor is the determination of the chambers judge wholly unreasonable,” reads a statement from the Alberta Court of Appeals.

The appeal from Widdowson and Pickle was dismissed.

The full decision can be found online here.

The University of Lethbridge provided the following statement to LNN in response to the Appeal Court’s ruling:

“Today’s ruling was on an appeal of a chamber judge’s denial to permit the filing of an amendment to the original application for review. It does not change the fundamental argument that will be heard in court in spring 2026. As this matter is still before the courts, the University will refrain from further comment,” the U of L said.

LNN has reached out to Widdowson for comments.