A lesson on ice: hockey, asymmetry, and the paradox of Canadian unity

In late May, I came across an article in the New York Times by Vjosa Isai and Matina Stevis-Gridneff, boldly titled "In Canada province, a bid for secession. With referendum plan, some Alberta residents vent their frustration". The title left little room for interpretation: in Alberta – the resource-rich engine in Western Canada – talk of secession and demands for greater autonomy have once again taken center stage.
The backdrop is the enduring asymmetry that characterizes Canada’s federal structure. Most recently, attention has been drawn to the final passage – by Royal Assent – of Bill 54, also known as the Election Statues Amendment Act 2025. Among its provisions is a notable reform to the Citizen Initiative Act, lowering the thresholds required to trigger a popular referendum. To many in Alberta, this reform has become a symbol: not of empowerment, but of discontent with the outcome of the latest federal election, in which the Liberals – despite securing a national victory – managed to win only two seats in the entire province.
This is the paradox of federal asymmetry: it creates spaces for pluralism but also for fracture. And just when the federation seems most fragmented, something unexpected happens – hockey returns to the national stage. But not just as a sport.
A Canadian team – the Edmonton Oilers – has reached the Stanley Cup Final, the pinnacle of professional ice hockey in North America. Their opponents: the Florida Panthers. And almost instantly, what seemed like a deeply divided country begins to rally as one.
The symbolism is hard to ignore. The Oilers – one of the most storied franchises in NHL history, with five Stanley Cup titles won thanks to legends like Mark Messier, Paul Coffey, Grant Fuhr, Jary Kurry, and of course the "Great One" Wayne Gretzky – are no longer seen just as Alberta’s team. In this moment, they have become Canada’s team.
In Vancouver, fans of the Canucks are donning Oilers colors. In Montreal, pubs are broadcasting the games and cheering for Edmonton. Even in Calgary – a historic rival – shops are selling Oilers t-shirts. Toronto’s CN Tower and Vancouver’s BC Place have been lit up in orange, blue, and white. Trucks filled with ice have left other arenas in symbolic support. A province threatening to leave is now the emotional center of a national movement.
How can this contradiction be explained? On one hand, the province is questioning its place in the federation; on the other, the country is emotionally united behind one of its teams. The answer lies in the cultural and symbolic power of the sport. Hockey becomes a lens through which we can reinterpret both cohesion and division, both identity and protest.
The showdown between Connor McDavid, the Oilers’ captain and one of the most electrifying talents in the game, and Sergei Bobrovsky, the Panther’s star goaltender, is just the tip of the iceberg. This final embodies a powerful sense of collective meaning, a shared identity that goes beyond local borders.
This duality reflects a useful legal-institutional distinction. Internally, Canada is a federation marked by asymmetry and periodic tension. Externally, however, it often operates as a coherent, unified actor. Whether in multilateral diplomacy, bilateral negotiations, or now – on the ice – Canada tends to present a united front. Can this be deemed to exist within the framework of the European Union? And does the Union itself have the capacity to manifest such a level of unity?
The European Union is showing signs of this cohesion, especially in its response to the growing tensions in the international context. It is therefore necessary to guarantee the overall stability of a system in which the balance between centrifugal and centripetal forces requires searching and researching a point of convergence through a dynamic process that postulates continuous adaptation. In fact, ice, both literally and metaphorically, is a slippery surface. It demands balance and caution. Yet, it is also a space for play, for rivalry, for community. A place where a puck can mean more than a statute, and an assist can resonate deeper than a referendum.
So perhaps today we can say this: hockey has something to teach constitutional law. It reminds us that national cohesion is not measured solely by the distribution of parliamentary seats, but by the fleeting, powerful moments in which people recognize themselves as part of something greater.

Alessandro Sorpresa
Alessandro Sorpresa is a PhD candidate in European and international Legal Studies at the University of Verona (Italy) and a lawyer in the district of Verona. His research focuses on federalism and regionalism, asymmetric territorial governance, and the challenges of pluralism in multilevel constitutional systems. He has been Visiting Fellow at the ECRF of the University of Tübingen, Germany (2024) and Visiting Researcher at the University of Antwerp, Belgium (2025). His interests include asymmetric systems and fundamental rights, political institutions and representation, autonomy and minority issues, relations between States and sports.
Discover
Making research visible.
Find the connected experts, projects, publications, and research areas behind this blog post.
This content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license except for third-party materials or where otherwise noted.

