Section 17 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

(2) Everyone has the right to use English or French in any debates and other proceedings of the legislature of New Brunswick.As noted in the Supreme Court decision New Brunswick Broadcasting Co. v. Nova Scotia (1993), the stated application of section 17 is to "Parliament."

However, she did acknowledge that section 17 being exempt from the notwithstanding clause, and the amending formula making Canada's language rights impossible to amend without the support from all provinces as well as the federal government, reveal language rights to be "a response to the peculiar facts of Canada's history."

This line of thinking regarding section 133 also appeared in the Supreme Court case MacDonald v. City of Montreal (1986).

In MacDonald, Jones v. Attorney General of New Brunswick (1975) was cited as finding that section 133 did not really effectively establish a sophisticated official bilingualism for Canada.

According to MacDonald, having translators in Parliament is thus not mandatory under section 133, since there is no guarantee everyone will be able to understand an MP who speaks in either English or French.