COVID-19
TDF files Notice of Constitutional Question for upcoming ArriveCAN trial
News release from The Democracy Fund
Written by TDF’s Legal Team
Court document filed by TDF alleges that ArriveCAN requirement was not properly specified by the Minister of Health.
The Democracy Fund (TDF) has filed a Notice of Constitutional Question in the Ontario Court of Justice over an ArriveCAN ticket issued to one of their “fight-the-fines” clients. The court application argues that the client had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information the government demanded she disclose through ArriveCAN, which included information about her vaccination status. TDF further argues that this demand constituted an unreasonable seizure as it was not authorized by law.
While the Government of Canada has claimed that ArriveCAN was legally required starting in November 2020, TDF argues that the orders-in-council that purport to establish ArriveCAN make no reference to ArriveCAN. Rather, the orders say that information must be provided by an “electronic means specified by the Minister of Health.”
The question is, when and where did the Minister of Health specify ArriveCAN to be the electronic means referred to in the orders in council?
TDF’s litigation director, Alan Honner, says he made several inquiries to government ministries about when and where the Minister of Health actually specified ArriveCAN to be the electronic means set out in the orders in council. He never received an answer.
The only document TDF uncovered which specifies ArriveCAN as the electronic means set out in the orders-in-council is dated November 26, 2021, more than a full year after ArriveCAN was supposed to become legally mandatory.
“There is a real question about whether the government actually took the steps to make ArriveCAN legally binding on travellers prior to November 2021,” says TDF Litigation Director Alan Honner. “If the Minister of Health failed to make the specification as required by law except for this one time, then for at least an entire year, the government was telling us that ArriveCAN was legally required when it was not.”
TDF had previously filed an application in the Federal Court of Canada making this same argument. That application was dismissed for mootness because all COVID-19 border measures were rescinded within weeks of TDF filing its court documents.
TDF will be arguing at the upcoming trial that the November 26 document does not apply to their client. Among other things, the document refers to an order in council that was rescinded and not to the order in council that their client was charged with breaching.
“The good news is that the application cannot be struck for mootness because we are dealing with an active ticket,” says Honner. “The bad news is that the prosecution can avoid the argument by dropping the charges.”
The trial will take place on February 15, 2024.
To support our work, please consider making a tax-deductible donation on this page.
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.
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.
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.
The “Hardhat Vote” Has Embraced Pierre Poilievre
RFK Jr. Completely Shatters the Media’s Favorite Lie About Autism
The Net-Zero Dream Is Unravelling And The Consequences Are Global
Ted Cruz, Jim Jordan Ramp Up Pressure On Google Parent Company To Deal With ‘Censorship’
‘War On Coal Is Finally Over’: Energy Experts Say Trump Admin’s Deregulation Agenda Could Fuel Coal’s ‘Revival’
The Pandemic Justice Phase Begins as Criminal Investigations Commence
Daily Caller EXCLUSIVE: Trump’s Broad Ban On Risky Gain-Of-Function Research Nears Completion
-
2025 Federal Election7 hours agoStudy links B.C.’s drug policies to more overdoses, but researchers urge caution
-
2025 Federal Election1 day agoPolice Associations Endorse Conservatives. Poilievre Will Shut Down Tent Cities
-
Alberta1 day agoRed Deer Justice Centre Grand Opening: Building access to justice for Albertans
-
conflict1 day agoMarco Rubio says US could soon ‘move on’ from Ukraine conflict: ‘This is not our war’
-
Business23 hours agoChinese firm unveils palm-based biometric ID payments, sparking fresh privacy concerns
-
International1 day agoPope Francis’ body on display at the Vatican until Friday
-
2025 Federal Election1 day agoNext federal government should end corporate welfare for forced EV transition
-
International16 hours agoPope Francis Got Canadian History Wrong