Chloé DuboisOn Wednesday, October 14, 2026, the White House formally invoked executive privilege in the federal lawsuit over the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C. The filing aims to shield communications about the center's management from a congresswoman who sits on its board. The move has Canadians asking a practical question: what does "privilege" actually let anyone refuse to hand over in court?
What happened in the Kennedy Center case
According to NBC News, Joshua Hoyt, a deputy counsel to the president, told the court that Donald Trump was invoking the presidential communications privilege "at the direction of the President." The claim covers exchanges among the president, his advisers (inside and outside government) and Kennedy Center staff about how the center is run.
The case is Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio) v. Trump, before U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper. Beatty, an ex officio board member, is challenging Trump's plan to put his name on the building and his directive to close it for two years of renovations.
The Justice Department had signalled earlier in October that the privilege would be claimed. It called Beatty's discovery request a "fishing expedition" and argued that the president's involvement "is undoubtedly in his official capacity."
Beatty's lawyers, Norm Eisen and Nathaniel Zelinsky, say Trump is a defendant as board chairman, not as president. In an October 6 filing they argued the center is not part of the executive branch. Judge Cooper has not yet ruled on the privilege claim.
What does "privilege" mean when you are asked to testify?
Privilege is a legal reason to withhold information that would otherwise be produced in a lawsuit. It is not a general right to stay silent. Courts treat it as an exception, and the person claiming it usually has to justify it.
Most people never meet executive privilege. They do meet its everyday cousins: solicitor-client privilege, litigation privilege and settlement privilege. All of them can be raised when a lawyer tells a witness not to answer a question at a deposition, as happened with the Kennedy Center's executive director, according to reports this week.
In U.S. litigation, a lawyer instructing a witness not to answer is a flashpoint. The other side can ask a judge to compel the answer, and the judge decides whether the privilege really applies.
Does Canada have an equivalent?
Yes, but the design differs. Canadian federal law protects what it calls "confidences of the King's Privy Council for Canada," meaning Cabinet secrets. Under section 39 of the Canada Evidence Act, when a minister or the Clerk of the Privy Council certifies in writing that information is such a confidence, a court must refuse disclosure without even examining it. The text is published on the Justice Laws website of the Government of Canada.
That is a stronger shield than the U.S. version in one respect: the court does not weigh the claim. It also has limits. Section 39(4) says the protection does not apply to confidences that have existed for more than twenty years.
For ordinary Canadians the lesson is different. Cabinet confidence belongs to governments. What you are likely to face is a smaller version of the same fight, in a civil claim, a workplace dispute or an estate matter.
A concrete case: the refused answer in a $250,000 claim
Take a Calgary contractor, sued in January 2026 for $250,000 by a client who says a renovation was defective. At the examination for discovery, the contractor's former project manager is asked what the contractor said in a March 2025 email thread with the contractor's own lawyer.
If the thread was a request for legal advice, then solicitor-client privilege applies and the lawyer can properly instruct the witness not to answer. That privilege belongs to the contractor, not to the witness.
If, however, the thread was a business discussion in which the lawyer was merely copied, then the privilege claim is weak. The other side can bring a motion to compel, and a judge may order the answer. If the refusal is found improper, the court can award costs against the refusing party, often in the thousands of dollars, and the delay can add weeks or months to a case.
If the contractor waives privilege by sharing the lawyer's advice with a third party, such as a supplier, then the protection can be lost on that topic entirely. That is why the timing and the audience of every message matter.
The point mirrors the Kennedy Center dispute. A broad claim ("everything we discussed is privileged") is the easiest to challenge. A narrow, document-by-document claim is the hardest to dislodge.
What to watch next in the U.S. case
Judge Cooper now has two questions in front of him. The first is whether the Kennedy Center's management counts as official presidential business or as the work of a trustee. The second is whether advisers who hold no government job can sit inside the privilege at all.
The White House says they can. Beatty's lawyers call the assertion a "cover-up" and say it is "procedurally and substantively improper." Earlier this month the judge allowed Beatty's team to ask more about a photo of Trump on Air Force One viewing a "Kennedy Center DEMOLISH" poster, so the privilege claim now collides with a discovery ruling he has already made.
Whatever he decides, the ruling will show how far a blanket privilege claim can stretch when it meets a determined opponent.
Why a lawyer's early advice changes the outcome
Privilege disputes are decided on paper long before anyone testifies. Three habits tend to matter:
- Label and sort documents early. A privilege log that lists each withheld item, with its date and author, is far more persuasive than a blanket objection.
- Keep legal advice inside the circle. Forwarding a lawyer's email to a friend, a supplier or a journalist can waive protection.
- Separate business from legal. Courts look at the dominant purpose of a communication. A message that mixes strategy, gossip and legal questions is hard to defend.
An experienced litigation lawyer can also tell you when to stop fighting. Judges notice overreach, and a weak privilege claim can damage credibility on points you would otherwise win.
What to do if you are asked to produce or testify
If you receive a request for documents, a summons or a notice of examination, do not wait until the day of the hearing to raise privilege. Deadlines for producing documents are often as short as 30 days, and missing them can trigger penalties.
Before you answer anything, collect the relevant emails, texts and files. Do not delete or alter anything, even if you think it is harmful. Then speak with a lawyer licensed in your province about which items are protected and which are not.
If your dispute involves a government body or a public institution, your lawyer can also tell you whether any statutory confidentiality rule, such as the Cabinet confidence rule above, is likely to be raised against you.
Get an expert's view before your deposition
Whether you are a witness, a business owner or someone sued over a contract, privilege questions are rarely obvious. On Expert Zoom you can consult a legal expert who can review your situation and explain what you can withhold, what you must disclose and how to prepare.
This article is general information based on public reporting as of October 16, 2026, and is not legal advice. Rules differ by province and by case; consult a qualified lawyer about your own situation.
