COVID-19
Court to hear challenge to Saskatchewan’s Covid gathering limits

News release from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announces that the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal will hear the appeal of Jasmin Grandel and Darrell Mills on Tuesday, February 6, 2024, at 10 AM CT, at 520 Spadina Crescent East, in Saskatoon. Ms. Grandel and Mr. Mills challenge Saskatchewan’s former ban on outdoor gatherings of more than 10 persons as an unjustified violation of their Charter freedom of peaceful assembly and other Charter rights and freedoms. From March 17, 2020, until July 11, 2021, Saskatchewan imposed various prohibitions on outdoor gatherings, including limiting them to only 10 people. At the same time, Saskatchewan allowed more than 10 people to meet indoors. Jasmin Grandel and Darrell Mills attended various peaceful outdoor protests in 2020 and 2021, resulting in hefty fines for violating Public Health Orders. At the time, Jasmin Grandel was a kinesiology student at the University of Regina, with a young son in kindergarten. She was concerned with the inconsistency of the Public Health Orders and with their detrimental psychological and economic effects. She feared that the Orders would negatively impact small businesses, leading to unemployment and poverty for families. Darrell Mills, who also participated in peaceful outdoor protests, is a resident of Saskatoon with 30 years of experience in mechanical construction. He is certified in Mask Fit Testing and trained in supplied air breathing systems. He was concerned about the negative health impacts of improper mask use. While outdoor gatherings were restricted to a maximum of 10 persons for certain periods, the province permitted numerous public indoor gatherings that far exceeded 10 persons. At the same time, Saskatchewan Chief Medical Health Officer Dr. Saqib Shahab stated that “outdoor gatherings while observing physical distancing are better than indoor gatherings.” On June 5, 2020, then-Regina Police Chief Evan Bray, along with many other officers, attended a large Black Lives Matter rally in Regina with hundreds of people, thereby violating existing public health orders and garnering significant media attention. At the time, Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe said, “…my assumption is that the law enforcement officials have used their judgment with respect to this particular rally…” Dr. Shahab called it a “special event,” and no one was charged with breaching public health orders. Six months later, numerous Saskatchewan residents were charged and prosecuted for violating public health orders because they, like participants in the Black Lives Matter rally, had peacefully protested outdoors. In April 2021, lawyers provided by the Justice Centre filed a constitutional challenge to the restrictions on outdoor gatherings, on behalf of Ms. Grandel and Mr. Mills. The Originating Application challenges these restrictions for violating the Charter freedoms of thought, belief, opinion and expression, association and peaceful assembly. The Application also suggests that pro-freedom protests against government lockdown policies have been especially targeted by law enforcement. At trial, an eminent infectious disease specialist provided expert evidence that outdoor transmission of Covid was negligible, where physical distancing could be practiced and where single-day gatherings with no indoor component could take place. The government did not present evidence that Covid was transmitted at outdoor gatherings. Instead, they relied on the ‘precautionary principle’ put forward by its public health expert that lockdown measures should be taken even if “cause and effect” had not been fully established scientifically. “It appears that lockdown harms were not considered by the government or by the court, when applying this ‘precautionary’ principle. Neither the Saskatchewan government nor the lower court wanted to take precautions against the physical, mental, social, financial and economic harms that lockdowns inflicted on people,” stated John Carpay, president of the Justice Centre. On September 20, 2022, Justice D. B. Konkin of the Court of King’s Bench of Saskatchewan upheld the government’s restrictions on outdoor gatherings as justified violations of Charter freedoms. Justice Konkin assessed only the breach to freedom of expression, representing only one of the various Charter rights alleged to be breached by the Applicants. In his decision, he wrote, “In a state of public health emergency wreaking severe havoc on the health of Saskatchewan residents, Sask [sic] was burdened with the immense task of balancing multiple interests.” Andre Memauri, lawyer for Ms. Grandel and Mr. Mills, stated, “Our infectious disease specialist made it clear at trial that the outdoor transmission of Covid-19 was negligible, much like every other respiratory illness in history. There was no basis for the Saskatchewan government to impose greater restrictions on people’s rights to assemble, express themselves and associate outdoors as opposed to indoors. The rule of law means that laws should be enforced equally, but the Saskatchewan Government encouraged and supported Black Lives Matter protests outdoors in large numbers while ticketing people who six months later protested the violations of their Charter freedoms.”
2025 Federal Election
Conservatives promise to ban firing of Canadian federal workers based on COVID jab status

From LifeSiteNews
The Conservative platform also vows that the party will oppose mandatory digital ID systems and a central bank digital currency if elected.
Pierre Poilievre’s Conservative Party’s 2025 election platform includes a promise to “ban” the firing of any federal worker based “solely” on whether or not they chose to get the COVID shots.
On page 23 of the “Canada First – For A Change” plan, which was released on Tuesday, the promise to protect un-jabbed federal workers is mentioned under “Protect Personal Autonomy, Privacy, and Data Security.”
It promises that a Conservative government will “Ban the dismissal of federal workers based solely on COVID vaccine status.”
The Conservative Party also promises to “Oppose any move toward mandatory digital ID systems” as well as “Prohibit the Bank of Canada from developing or implementing a central bank digital currency.”
In October 2021, the Liberal government of former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced unprecedented COVID-19 jab mandates for all federal workers and those in the transportation sector. The government also announced that the unjabbed would no longer be able to travel by air, boat, or train, both domestically and internationally.
This policy resulted in thousands losing their jobs or being placed on leave for non-compliance. It also trapped “unvaccinated” Canadians in the country.
COVID jab mandates, which also came from provincial governments with the support of the federal government, split Canadian society. The shots have been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects, such as death, including in children.
Many recent rulings have gone in favor of those who chose not to get the shots and were fired as a result, such as an arbitrator ruling that one of the nation’s leading hospitals in Ontario must compensate 82 healthcare workers terminated after refusing to get the jabs.
Beyond health concerns, many Canadians, especially Catholics, opposed the injections on moral grounds because of their link to fetal cell lines derived from the tissue of aborted babies.
COVID-19
RFK Jr. Launches Long-Awaited Offensive Against COVID-19 mRNA Shots

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH
As millions of Americans anxiously await action from the new HHS leadership against the COVID-19 mRNA injections—injected into over 9 million children this year—Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has finally gone publicly on the offensive:
Let’s go over each key point made by RFK Jr.:
The recommendation for children was always dubious. It was dubious because kids had almost no risk for COVID-19. Certain kids that had very profound morbidities may have a slight risk. Most kids don’t.
In the largest review to date on myocarditis following SARS-CoV-2 infection vs. COVID-19 vaccination, Mead et al found that vaccine-induced myocarditis is not only significantly more common but also more severe—particularly in children and young males. Our findings make clear that the risks of the shots overwhelmingly outweigh any theoretical benefit:
The OpenSAFELY study included more than 1 million adolescents and children and found that myocarditis was documented ONLY in COVID-19 vaccinated groups and NOT after COVID-19 infection. There were NO COVID-19-related deaths in any group. A&E attendance and unplanned hospitalization were higher after first vaccination compared to unvaccinated groups:
So why are we giving this to tens of millions of kids when the vaccine itself does have profound risk? We’ve seen huge associations of myocarditis and pericarditis with strokes, with other injuries, with neurological injuries.
The two largest COVID-19 vaccine safety studies ever conducted, involving 99 million (Faksova et al) and 85 million people (Raheleh et al), confirm RFK Jr.’s concerns, documenting significantly increased risks of serious adverse events following vaccination, including:
- Myocarditis (+510% after second dose)
- Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis (+278% after first dose)
- Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis (+223% after first dose)
- Guillain-Barré Syndrome (+149% after first dose)
- Heart Attack (+286% after second dose)
- Stroke (+240% after first dose)
- Coronary Artery Disease (+244% after second dose)
- Cardiac Arrhythmia (+199% after first dose)
And this was clear even in the clinical data that came out of Pfizer. There were actually more deaths. There were about 23% more deaths in the vaccine group than the placebo group. We need to ask questions and we need to consult with parents.
Actually, according to the Pfizer’s clinical trial data, there were 43% more deaths in the vaccine group compared to the placebo group when post-unblinding deaths are included:
We need to give people informed consent, and we shouldn’t be making recommendations that are not good for the population.
Public acknowledgment of the grave harms of COVID-19 vaccines signals that real action is right around the corner. However, we must hope that action is taken for ALL age groups, as no one is spared from their life-reducing effects:
Alessandria et al (n=290,727, age > 10 years): People vaccinated with 2 doses lost 37% of life expectancy compared to the unvaccinated population during follow-up.
Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation
Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
Trump Has Driven Canadians Crazy. This Is How Crazy.
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Carney’s Hidden Climate Finance Agenda
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
The Anhui Convergence: Chinese United Front Network Surfaces in Australian and Canadian Elections
-
Automotive14 hours ago
Hyundai moves SUV production to U.S.
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
Study links B.C.’s drug policies to more overdoses, but researchers urge caution
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
When it comes to pipelines, Carney’s words flow both ways
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Conservatives promise to ban firing of Canadian federal workers based on COVID jab status
-
International2 days ago
Pope Francis Got Canadian History Wrong