As they faced continued opposition to the new stadium and associated development at Lansdowne Park, city council last week suggested a pretty unsporting solution.

The prospect of a legal appeal from Friends of Lansdowne, who failed last month in their court challenge of the city’s sole-sourced deal with the Ottawa Sports Entertainment Group, had some councillors suggesting a little financial pressure might cut down on such civic impudence.

The city has a policy against trying to recover its legal costs from citizen groups who sue it unless the court actions are “frivolous and vexatious,” or, in lay terms, time-wasting bull. Why not revise that policy, suggested some, and treat legitimate legal challenges in the same bare-knuckled fashion?

The city spent some $1.2 million defending the court case, and trying to recover those costs from the less-than-flush Friends of Lansdowne could discourage further argument.

To Ian Lee, an FOL member and Carleton prof, holding out the possibility of sticking unsuccessful litigants with the city’s legal costs is bullying, plain and simple. “For them now to engage in these threats is, I think, an abuse of power because they are trying to intimidate supporters and followers of FOL,” he said.

Lee also provided a little historical perspective on how activists have used the courts to win important advances on civil rights, abortion and gay marriage. Sometimes governments have been wrong, and sometimes it takes legal action to prove it.

Until recently, Lee pointed out, the federal government even subsidized its opponents in equality-rights cases though the Court Challenges Program. The Harper government, not known as being immoderately fond of dissent, cut funding to the program in 2006. Something of this attitude may now be filtering down to our municipal government.

Those advocating the legal-cost-recovery scheme spoke of protecting taxpayers, but whose best interests are really served by sending a message that you can only fight city hall if you have a sufficiently hefty bankroll?

That message also isn’t seemingly being received as intended. Lee is already musing about taking the Lansdowne challenge to the Supreme Court and contacting the Canadian Civil Liberties Association: “They’ve had ample experience suing governments, and I want to see what information they have when governments try to use costs as a punitive tool to suppress a lawsuit.”

Overall, there are likely smarter ways to answer your critics than simply trying to make criticism unaffordable.