Kenney says the province will continue to press its case that challenges Bill C69, now before the Alberta Court of Appeal, and will discuss the next steps on the carbon tax with Albertans as well as with other provinces who are against the carbon tax.
"We are pleased Canada's highest court has confirmed that the federal government has the legal authority to fight climate change through minimum national standards of price stringency to reduce GHG emissions", said Joshua Ginsberg, lawyer with Ecojustice's law clinic at the University of Ottawa.
"One thing Albertans can be sure of is we are not going to use this, the excuse of this decision, or the federal carbon tax, to squeeze more money for the government out of Albertans".
In Ottawa, the federal Conservatives said they'd repeal the carbon tax if elected.
The split decision upholds a pivotal part of the Liberal climate-change plan, accounting for at least one-third of the emissions Canada aims to cut over the next decade.
"The undisputed existence of a threat to the future of humanity can not be ignored", wrote Chief Justice Richard Wagner in the 6-3 decision.
Given that, said Wagner, Canada's evidence that this is a matter of national concern, is sound.
"The undisputed existence of a threat to the future of humanity can not be ignored", he wrote.
Justice Suzanne Cote dissented in part, agreeing climate change is an issue of national concern but taking issue with the power the federal cabinet gave itself to adjust the law's scope, including which fuels the price would apply to.
"Find other differences to disagree with the government on and create a true cross-partisan consensus on how to attack climate change in Canada", Butts said.
Under the carbon pricing act, Ottawa can impose a federal levy on provinces that do not have an adequate carbon pricing system of their own.
Premier Jason Kenney has said he is disappointed with the ruling but the province will continue to fight the carbon tax. That dashed the hopes of the governments of Saskatchewan, Ontario and Alberta, all of whom were seeking to axe the tax. "It was not identified in the constitution", he told CTV News Edmonton.
Provinces were allowed to implement their own plans.
"This is part of his "fight back" strategy, but aside from winning the 2019 election, nearly every subsequent fight they've lost".
"We now know that we have a partner in the Supreme Court, that they recognize the seriousness, the urgency of the matter and the need for coordination and collaboration across levels of government".
"Standing up for Saskatchewan people is always a fight that's worth having", Moe said, when asked if perusing the legal challenge was worthwhile.
Lewis predicted that by 2030, when the carbon tax hits $170 per tonne, it'll cost an extra $12.50 to produce an acre of wheat.
Saskatchewan, Ontario and Alberta challenged the Liberal government's 2018 Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act in court, arguing it was a federal overreach into provincial jurisdiction over everything from taxes and the environment to natural-resource development. The court dismissed the challenge in a 3-2 ruling.
"(The) Supreme Court of Canada just dropped a love letter to the planet", said Catherine Abreu, the executive director of Climate Action Network Canada.
"Just because the court says that the federal government can punish people for filling up their gas tanks and driving to work and heating their homes, doesn't mean that the federal government should do that". The province has had various forms of a carbon tax for large industrial emitters since 2007. That would be fun...
Supreme Court rules federal carbon tax constitutional
From praise to disappointment and outrage, reaction is coming in swiftly to the Supreme Court decision on the federal carbon tax. The case first went to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, which ruled against the provincial government in May 2019.