Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Censorship Industrial Complex

TDF and James Kitchen appeal Monique LaGrange decision to Alberta Court of Appeal

Published

11 months ago

5 minute read

TDF’s Legal Team

 

Written by 

 

The Democracy Fund (TDF), together with lawyer James Kitchen, will appeal a recent Alberta Court decision involving school trustee Monique LaGrange. Mrs. LaGrange was a trustee of the Red Deer Catholic school board until the board disqualified her as a result of memes she posted and media interviews she gave, of which a majority of the trustees disapproved.

Mr. Kitchen has now filed his Notices of Appeal with the Alberta Court of Appeal, which can be read here and here.

In 2023, Mrs. LaGrange shared a meme on her personal Facebook account outlining her concerns about the increasing indoctrination of students into Queer theory and transgender ideology. The meme featured two side-by-side images: one of young children holding swastika flags and the other of young children holding pride progress flags, accompanied by the caption, “Brainwashing is brainwashing.” The post garnered support but also criticism, especially from teachers and other school trustees. One of the trustees submitted a complaint alleging that by posting the meme Mrs. LaGrange had violated many sections of the new trustee code of conduct.

Following a hearing in September 2023, a majority of the board of trustees determined Mrs. LaGrange had breached the code of conduct. The board imposed several sanctions, including that she cease making any public statements in areas touching upon or relating to the 2SLGBTQ+ community, issue a public apology, and complete sensitivity training at her own expense.

Mrs. LaGrange refused to issue an apology and maintained that her actions were consistent with her commitment to protecting children, stating, “I was elected to stand up and protect our children, and that is what I am doing.”

Shortly thereafter, another trustee submitted a complaint about Mrs. LaGrange, alleging that she had again violated the code of conduct and also breached the sanctions by posting another meme and doing two media interviews. The meme was a popular one depicting a wolf with colourful make-up with the caption, “I just want to read some books to your chickens”.

After a second hearing, a majority of the trustees again determined Mrs. LaGrange had breached the code of conduct and the sanction regarding public comments. The board then disqualified her as a trustee, effectively kicking her off the board.

The lawyer for Mrs. LaGrange, James Kitchen, said:

“This case is the first of its kind. Never before has an Alberta board of school trustees kicked another trustee off the board for what effectively amounts to a disagreement regarding expressed political and religious beliefs (disguised, in our view, as trustee misconduct). Such an outcome has been made possible by the recent adoption of trustee codes of conduct by Alberta school boards. These new codes enable a majority of trustees to censor and cancel individual trustees with whom they politically disagree. In this case, it appears that a majority of politically left-leaning school trustees applied the code of conduct to a politically disfavoured trustee in order to censure, humiliate, and remove Monique for her outspoken opposition to the sexualization and indoctrination of young students.”

TDF and Mr. Kitchen challenged the board’s decision at a judicial review at the Alberta Court of King’s Bench. The Court varied the board’s apology requirement but otherwise upheld all of the board’s findings.

TDF litigation director Mark Joseph expressed concern over the broader implications of the case, stating:

“Disqualifying a democratically-elected representative based on public comments sets a dangerous precedent. It undermines free speech rights, tolerance for political diversity, and representative democracy by allowing officials to impose ideological purity tests on electoral candidates. The proper response to allegations of bad policy is repudiation at the ballot box rather than official disqualification. If upheld, this decision will pose a significant threat to democratic rights in Canada.”

About The Democracy Fund

Founded in 2021, The Democracy Fund (TDF) is a Canadian charity dedicated to constitutional rights, advancing education and relieving poverty. TDF promotes constitutional rights through litigation and public education. TDF supports an access to justice initiative for Canadians whose civil liberties have been infringed by government lockdowns and other public policy responses to the pandemic.

Before Post

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Business / 3 hours ago

Storm clouds of uncertainty as BC courts deal another blow to industry and investment

Health / 3 hours ago

US podcaster Glenn Beck extends a lifeline to a Saskatchewan woman waiting for MAiD

Censorship Industrial Complex / 3 hours ago

Liberals gain support for ‘hate speech’ bill targeting Bible passages against homosexuality

Censorship Industrial Complex

Liberals gain support for ‘hate speech’ bill targeting Bible passages against homosexuality

Published on December 9, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

The Bloc Québécois are now backing the hate-speech Bill C-9 in Canada after the Liberal government agreed to take away a religious exception.

A Liberal government bill to criminalize parts of the Bible dealing with homosexuality under Canada’s new “hate speech” laws looks closer to becoming reality after gaining the support of the Bloc Québécois party when a religious exception was removed.

The National Post reported that the Bloc Québécois are now backing the hate-speech Bill C-9 after the Liberal government of Prime Minister Mark Carney agreed to take away a religious exception.

Bill C-9, the Combating Hate Act, as reported by LifeSiteNews, has been blasted by constitutional experts as allowing empowered police and the government to go after those it deems to have violated a person’s “feelings” in a “hateful” way.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, a government insider revealed that the Liberal government plans to remove religious exemptions from Canada’s hate-speech laws by modifying a bill. This would affect passages of the Bible dealing with homosexuality.

A recent media report states that the Carney Liberals and the separatist Bloc Québécois want to amend Bill C-9, which would “criminalize sections of the Bible, Quran, Torah, and other sacred texts,” Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre noted yesterday on X.

Both the Liberals and the Bloc are on board to support the removal of a religious exemption in Canada’s Criminal Code for the bill.

On Monday, Canadian Justice Minister Sean Fraser was rather mum on the deal made with the Bloc, which now says the deal is on thin ice due to canceled justice committee meetings.

Fraser said that it is his “priority” to see “this bill adopted,” but admitted it will need the support of other parties.

“That’s going to require that we collaborate with different parties who have different points of view,” he said.

Liberal MP Marc Miller had said earlier in the year that certain passages of the Bible are “hateful” because of what it says about homosexuality, and those who recite the passages should be jailed. As reported by LifeSiteNews, he was recently appointed as a government minister by Carney.

Canadian Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis blasted the Carney Liberals’ federal plan to criminalize parts of the Bible as an attack on “Christians,” warning it sets a “dangerous precedent” for Canadian society.

In response, the party launched a petition over fear that religious texts could be criminalized.

Continue Reading

Business

The EU Insists Its X Fine Isn’t About Censorship. Here’s Why It Is.

Published on December 8, 2025

By

logo

By Christina Maas

Europe calls it transparency, but it looks a lot like teaching the internet who’s allowed to speak.

When the European Commission fined X €120 million on December 5, officials could not have been clearer. This, they said, was not about censorship. It was just about “transparency.”
They repeat it so often you start to wonder why.
The fine marks the first major enforcement of the Digital Services Act, Europe’s new censorship-driven internet rulebook.
It was sold as a consumer protection measure, designed to make online platforms safer and more accountable, and included a whole list of censorship requirements, fining platforms that don’t comply.
The Commission charged X with three violations: the paid blue checkmark system, the lack of advertising data, and restricted data access for researchers.
None of these touches direct content censorship. But all of them shape visibility, credibility, and surveillance, just in more polite language.
Musk’s decision to turn blue checks into a subscription feature ended the old system where establishment figures, journalists, politicians, and legacy celebrities got verification.
The EU called Musk’s decision “deceptive design.” The old version, apparently, was honesty itself. Before, a blue badge meant you were important. After, it meant you paid. Brussels prefers the former, where approved institutions get algorithmic priority, and the rest of the population stays in the queue.
The new system threatened that hierarchy. Now, anyone could buy verification, diluting the aura of authority once reserved for anointed voices.
Reclaim The Net is sustained by its readers.
Your support fuels the fight for privacy, free speech and digital civil liberties while giving you access to exclusive content, practical how to guides, premium features and deeper dives into freedom-focused tech.
Become a supporter here.
However, that’s not the full story. Under the old Twitter system, verification was sold as a public service, but in reality it worked more like a back-room favor and a status purchase.
The main application process was shut down in 2010, so unless you were already famous, the only way to get a blue check was to spend enough money on advertising or to be important enough to trigger impersonation problems.
Ad Age reported that advertisers who spent at least fifteen thousand dollars over three months could get verified, and Twitter sales reps told clients the same thing. That meant verification was effectively a perk reserved for major media brands, public figures, and anyone willing to pay. It was a symbol of influence rationed through informal criteria and private deals, creating a hierarchy shaped by cronyism rather than transparency.
Under the new X rules, everyone is on a level playing field.
Government officials and agencies now sport gray badges, symbols of credibility that can’t be purchased. These are the state’s chosen voices, publicly marked as incorruptible. To the EU, that should be a safeguard.
The second and third violations show how “transparency” doubles as a surveillance mechanism. X was fined for limiting access to advertising data and for restricting researchers from scraping platform content. Regulators called that obstruction. Musk called it refusing to feed the censorship machine.
The EU’s preferred researchers aren’t neutral archivists. Many have been documented coordinating with governments, NGOs, and “fact-checking” networks that flagged political content for takedown during previous election cycles.
They call it “fighting disinformation.” Critics call it outsourcing censorship pressure to academics.
Under the DSA, these same groups now have the legal right to demand data from platforms like X to study “systemic risks,” a phrase broad enough to include whatever speech bureaucrats find undesirable this month.
The result is a permanent state of observation where every algorithmic change, viral post, or trending topic becomes a potential regulatory case.
The advertising issue completes the loop. Brussels says it wants ad libraries to be fully searchable so users can see who’s paying for what. It gives regulators and activists a live feed of messaging, ready for pressure campaigns.
The DSA doesn’t delete ads; it just makes it easier for someone else to demand they be deleted.
That’s how this form of censorship works: not through bans, but through endless exposure to scrutiny until platforms remove the risk voluntarily.
The Commission insists, again and again, that the fine has “nothing to do with content.”
That may be true on a direct level, but the rules shape content all the same. When governments decide who counts as authentic, who qualifies as a researcher, and how visibility gets distributed, speech control doesn’t need to be explicit. It’s baked into the system.
Brussels calls it user protection. Musk calls it punishment for disobedience. This particular DSA fine isn’t about what you can say, it’s about who’s allowed to be heard saying it.
TikTok escaped similar scrutiny by promising to comply. X didn’t, and that’s the difference. The EU prefers companies that surrender before the hearing. When they don’t, “transparency” becomes the pretext for a financial hammer.
The €120 million fine is small by tech standards, but symbolically it’s huge.
It tells every platform that “noncompliance” means questioning the structure of speech the EU has already defined as safe.
In the official language of Brussels, this is a regulation. But it’s managed discourse, control through design, moderation through paperwork, censorship through transparency.
And the louder they insist it isn’t, the clearer it becomes that it is.
Reclaim The Net Needs Your Help
With your help, we can do more than hold the line. We can push back. We can expose censorship, highlight surveillance overreach, and amplify the voices of those being silenced.
If you have found value in our work, please consider becoming a supporter.
Your support does more than keep us independent. It also gives you access to exclusive content, deep dive exploration of freedom focused technology, member-only features, and practical how-to posts that help you protect your rights in the real world.
You help us expand our reach, educate more people, and continue this fight.
Please become a supporter today.
Thank you for your support.
Continue Reading

Trending

X