COVID-19
Supreme Court will not hear case about government’s violation of rights and freedoms

News release from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is disappointed that the Supreme Court of Canada has decided not to hear the appeal of the challenge to Manitoba’s lockdown restrictions. The decision was announced on Thursday, March 14, 2024.
The Leave to Appeal application, under the name Gateway Bible Baptist Church et al. v. Manitoba et al., was filed on September 18, 2023. Five Manitoba churches, a pastor and a deacon asked the Supreme Court of Canada to hear their appeal of the lower courts’ dismissal of their constitutional challenge to closures of churches and restrictions on outdoor gatherings during Covid lockdowns in late 2020 and 2021. Included in the application was protester Ross MacKay, who had been ticketed and who was seeking to appeal the lower courts’ dismissal of his constitutional challenge to the outdoor gathering limits.
Through public health orders, Manitoba had closed churches while permitting businesses to continue to operate. Taxis, in-person university classes, film and tv productions, law offices, and liquor stores were allowed to remain open. The Winnipeg Jets could meet and train indoors with their extended crew, and summer Olympic competitors were allowed to train indoors. Outdoor gatherings were reduced to no more than five people, while at the same time hundreds of people could legally gather indoors at big box stores.
The initial case was heard in May 2021 before the Manitoba Court of King’s Bench. The province did not produce any evidence that Covid spreads outdoors, or that outdoor gatherings were risky activities. That hearing did produce a significant admission from a government expert witness, Chief Microbiologist and Laboratory Specialist Dr. Jared Bullard, who, under questioning from Justice Centre lawyers, admitted that 56 percent of positive Covid cases were not infectious. The hearing was also notable for the Applicants’ expert report and testimony from world-renowned Stanford Professor, epidemiologist Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, co-author of The Great Barrington Declaration. Dr. Bhattacharya has moved on to even greater international fame as one of the litigants in a lawsuit, Missouri v. Biden, against the U.S federal government for medical censorship uncovered in The Twitter Files investigation.
The Manitoba Court of King’s Bench ruled that the government’s public health officials should not be “second guessed” and that the government need not meet a high threshold of providing persuasive evidence to demonstrably justify that violations of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms were reasonable. The Manitoba Court of King’s Bench did not order the unsuccessful Applicants to pay court costs, finding there to be significant public interest in having this case adjudicated.
In December 2022, the Applicants appealed. The appeal was dismissed by the Manitoba Court of Appeal in June 2023.
In the Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, lawyers provided by the Justice Centre argued that the case raised issues of national importance. For instance:
- How are constitutionally protected activities to be juridically measured against comparable non-constitutionally protected activities? What is the proper approach to the minimal impairment stage of the Oakes analysis with respect to public health orders that fully prohibit Charter-protected activities (e.g. In- person religious worship) while permitting comparable non-Charter-protected activities (e.g. In-person university classes, film and television productions, indoor team-training for the Winnipeg Jets, etc.).
- Does reliance on the “precautionary principle” satisfy the state’s onus under Charter section 1 to provide “cogent and persuasive” evidence to justify Charter-infringing measures?
The Applicants’ legal team believed the case was critically important, as it could have served as guidance for governments in crafting public health measures on efforts needed to accommodate Charter-protected rights and freedoms.
Allison Pejovic, lawyer for the Applicants, stated, “Our clients are disappointed in the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear their appeal. It was past time to have a conversation with Canada’s highest court about whether Charter-protected rights such as rights to worship and assemble ought to be prioritized over economic interests, such as ensuring that the Winnipeg Jets could practice indoors and that movie productions could continue. It was also critical to hear from the Court on the importance of respecting the Charter during a declared ’emergency’. Governments urgently needed the Supreme Court of Canada’s guidance as to the degree to which they should accommodate Charter rights during a future pandemic or other emergency proclaimed by government. Leaving that issue undecided at the highest level is a grave injustice for all Canadians.”
COVID-19
Canadian student denied religious exemption for COVID jab takes tech school to court

From LifeSiteNews
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is helping Philip Anisimov fight Ontario Tech University, which this week has to defend in court its decision to deregister the student.
An Ontario university student who was kicked out of school after his religious-based COVID vaccine exemption request was rejected is in court to argue his civil rights were violated.
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) is helping Philip Anisimov fight Ontario Tech University, which this week has to defend in court its decision to deregister the student for choosing not to receive the experimental, abortion-tainted COVID shots on religious grounds.
According to a press release from the JCCF, yesterday, April 15, and today, April 16, Anisimov’s legal team will be making arguments in an Ontario court that the university “violated his right to be free from discrimination on the basis of his religion.”
“The University tried to characterize Mr. Anisimov’s belief as a personal preference by arguing that vaccination is not truly contrary to his faith,” noted constitutional lawyer Hatim Kheir.
“Decision-makers are not permitted to engage in speculation and theological debates about which dogma is correct. So long as a belief is religious in nature and sincerely held, it must be accommodated,” Kheir explained, outlining how the Human Rights Code of the province has to be interpreted according to the law.
Anisimov’s case goes back to August 30, 2021, when Ontario, under the direction of its Chief Medical Health Officer Dr. Kieran Moore, mandated that all students in the province show proof of vaccination unless they have an exemption or agree to attend a COVID jab education session boasting about the shots.
However, the third option was not available at Ontario Tech University, as the government mandate allowed schools to chose whether or not they would offer such a program to students.
As a result, Anisimov, who had requested accommodation for religious reasons but was denied, was deregistered from all his courses.
He was then forced to spend an entire extra year to complete his studies. According to his lawyers, Ontario Tech University’s decision to not approve his COVID jab exemption request “not only disrupted his career plans but also violated his right to be free from discrimination on the basis of religion, as protected by the Ontario Human Rights Code.”
According to Kheir, “Students should not have to choose between remaining faithful to their religious convictions and being allowed to finish their education.”
“Mr. Anisimov has a sincere religious objection to the COVID vaccines and could have been accommodated without difficulty,” he added.
COVID vaccine mandates, as well as lockdowns, which came from provincial governments with the support of the federal government, split Canadian society. The mRNA shots have been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects in children.
Beyond health concerns, many Canadians, especially Catholics, opposed the vaccines on moral grounds because of their link to fetal cell lines derived from the tissue of aborted babies.
COVID-19
COVID virus, vaccines are driving explosion in cancer, billionaire scientist tells Tucker Carlson

From LifeSiteNews
The spike protein from the COVID virus and shots cause persistent inflammation, which in turn suppresses the immune system, according to the accomplished Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong.
A billionaire scientist and cancer drug inventor told Tucker Carlson that the COVID virus and mRNA “vaccine” are driving an explosion in cancer among the young and old alike.
Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, a transplant surgeon and owner of the Los Angeles Times, recently broke down in an interview how the COVID spike protein, persisting in people’s bodies both from the virus and the mRNA shots, is contributing to unprecedented cancer diagnoses.
Soon-Shiong likened the disturbing rise in atypical, aggressive cancer cases to a “non-infectious pandemic,” now claiming the lives of young people afflicted with cancers highly unusual for their age. He cited the fatal post-COVID case of a 13-year-old boy he had seen with pancreatic cancer usually found in people at least 45 to 50 years old.
He told Carlson how these cases were concerning him so much that he called a doctor friend whose experience mirrored his own. Soon-Shiong recounted how his friend told him, “Patrick, I’m now seeing an eight-year-old, a 10-year-old and 11-year-old with colon cancer … We’re seeing now 30-year-old, 40-year-old ladies, young ladies with ovarian cancer.”
Soon-Shiong explained that the challenge presented by cancer can be distilled into the question of how we can increase or activate the cancer killer cells and decrease or deactivate the cells that suppress the killer cells, which he called suppressor cells.
According to the doctor, what knocks these cells “out of equilibrium” is essentially inflammation.
A mechanism by which inflammation can help contribute to cancer is by flipping infection-killing neutrophils into suppressor cells, when the inflammation is “persistent,” according to Soon-Shiong.
Worse, after 50 years of scientific research and practice, he believes that “everything we’re doing” to address cancer “is tipping the scales towards the suppressor cells.”
To give context to the potential impact of COVID and its “vaccine,” he pointed out that there are cancer-causing viruses, called oncogenic, which persist in the body, thereby creating ongoing inflammation. COVID itself, as well as the mRNA shots created in response to the virus, both produce inflammatory spike proteins, he noted, which attach to blood vessels with ACE-2 receptors, found all throughout the body.
This would explain why after COVID, dysfunction in different organs — from the pancreas to the colon, and the heart to the brain — is being seen all of a sudden, Soon-Shiong continued. “You’ve seen young people have sudden heart attacks all of a sudden. You see young people with pancreatic cancer all of sudden. You see young people’s colon cancer all of a sudden.”
“So is it by coincidence that post COVID infection, post COVID vaccine, we’re seeing all these events where we know the spike protein goes? I don’t think so. I think it’s not a coincidence,” Soon-Shiong said. “So the question is, can we prove, is what I call long COVID virus persisting?”
“And the group at University of California, San Francisco, has now definitively proven that and published that in papers like Nature,” the doctor noted.
He said there is also published research showing that the persistence of the virus, which is likely the reason for “long COVID” symptoms, suppresses natural cancer-killer cells, making them “go to sleep.”
“And that’s why I sort of abandoned everything just to focus on how do we clear the virus, because the answer is to clear the virus from the body, the answer is to stop the inflammation,” Soon-Shiong said.
He has found that the virus persists in the body at least three to four years, and told Carlson he believes it cannot be cleared from a body that is immunosuppressed.
This accords with a Harvard study pointed to by the prolific internist and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, which shows that those suffering from long COVID likely have spike protein from the virus circulating in their bloodstream.
However, according to medical freedom champion Dr. Mark Trozzi and other doctors, there are simple ways people can clear their body of the COVID virus (or shot’s) spike protein, to which Soon-Shiong himself attributes the illness caused by the virus.
Trozzi has shared three methods by which one can help clear out the spike protein and minimize its effects: Accelerating the process of autophagy through intermittent fasting; ingesting Nattokinase, which “digests” the spike protein; and taking substances that block the uptake of the spike protein, such as ivermectin and quercetin.
Soon-Shiong believes the only way to clear the body of the virus itself is to have a “T cell, natural killer (NK) cells,” (a type of T cell), which are white blood cells which kill cancer cells. He attributed the fact that he himself did not suffer from a COVID infection to the manipulation of his own immune system, through what he calls a “bioshield.”
What the bioshield does is “educate your body to have these T cells, called memory T cells, that go and hide in the bone marrow and come out when they need it and kill that cell,” Soon-Shiong said. He told Carlson it was approved for public use in the U.S. in 2024 for bladder cancer.
Asked how we can strengthen our immune system for disease in general, Soon-Shiong said we should seek to “activate” the natural killer cell. This immune cell can be replenished with sleep and exposure to sunlight and can be preserved by avoiding food that has an immunosuppressive effect. This means sticking to natural foods and avoiding processed foods with toxins, such as red dye, according to the doctor.
During his interview with Carlson, Soon-Shiong also discussed how his proposed interventions for COVID were shut down by the FDA, the efforts to find “dirt” on him to prevent him from becoming the head of the NIH, his thoughts on Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the healthcare establishment’s conflicts of interest, and why he decided to buy the Los Angeles Times.
-
2025 Federal Election16 hours ago
RCMP Whistleblowers Accuse Members of Mark Carney’s Inner Circle of Security Breaches and Surveillance
-
illegal immigration2 days ago
Despite court rulings, the Trump Administration shows no interest in helping Abrego Garcia return to the U.S.
-
Health11 hours ago
WHO member states agree on draft of ‘pandemic treaty’ that could be adopted in May
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Housing starts unchanged since 1970s, while Canadian population growth has more than tripled
-
COVID-1911 hours ago
Canadian student denied religious exemption for COVID jab takes tech school to court
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Euthanasia is out of control in Canada, but nobody is talking about it on the campaign trail
-
2025 Federal Election11 hours ago
Neil Young + Carney / Freedom Bros
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
AI-Driven Election Interference from China, Russia, and Iran Expected, Canadian Security Officials Warn