This article examines the Supreme Court of Canada’s cost-benefit analysis of freedom of conscience and religion guaranteed by s. 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony. The article finds that while the Supreme Court’s reasoning was ultimately flawed, its use of cost-benefit analysis may be a positive development in the freedom of religion framework. The article also looks at the Court’s treatment of the freedom of conscience guarantee in relation to freedom of religion. The article suggests that this treatment may foreshadow a more uniform approach to the broader freedom of conscience and religion than was provided for in previous decisions.