Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

COVID-19

Trudeau government back in court to appeal ruling against its use of the Emergencies Act

Published

2 months ago

5 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

“Legal thresholds do not bend, much less break, in exigent circumstances. We are putting this and future governments on notice: even in times of crisis, no government is above the law”

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government is again in court to claim its use of the Emergencies Act to stop the 2022 Freedom Convoy was warranted, in appeal of a ruling from last year which found its use of the act was unjustified.   

Today, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) noted in a press release that it is before the Federal Court of Appeal “to defend its historic victory for the rule of law.” 

“While the extraordinary powers granted to the federal government through the Emergencies Act are necessary in extreme circumstances, they also threaten the rule of law and our democracy,” said Anaïs Bussières McNicoll, who serves as the Director of the Fundamental Freedoms program at the CCLA. 

McNicoll said that the CCLA will be urging the “Federal Court of Appeal to reject the federal government’s attempt to relax the thresholds necessary for invoking the  Act’s extraordinary powers.” 

“Legal thresholds do not bend, much less break, in exigent circumstances. We are putting this and future governments on notice: even in times of crisis, no government is above the law,” concluded McNicoll. 

In January of 2024, Canada’s Federal Court announced that the use of the EA by the Trudeau government in early 2022 to shut down Freedom Convoy, which was calling for an end to COVID mandates, was a direct violation of the nation’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms and thus was “not justified” and “infringed” on the rights of protesters.

The January 2024 decision by Federal Court Justice Richard Mosley saw the judge write, “Having found that the infringements of Charter sections 2(b) and 8 were not minimally impairing, I find that they were not justified under section 1.” 

Shortly after the court ruling, the Trudeau government announced that it would appeal Mosley’s ruling, claiming the federal court “erred in fact and law in declaring that the Regulations infringed subsection 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” 

Notably, in the Federal Court of Appeal, where the case is now being heard, 10 out of the 15 judges were appointed by Trudeau.     

The CCLA said that the government’s use of the EA “which had never been invoked before in Canada,” allowed the federal government to “enact wide-reaching orders without going through the ordinary democratic process—but only once stringent legal thresholds are met.” 

In early 2022, the Freedom Convoy saw thousands of Canadians from coast to coast come to Ottawa to demand an end to COVID mandates in all forms. Despite the peaceful nature of the protest, Trudeau’s government enacted the EA on February 14, 2022. 

During the clear-out of protesters after the EA was put in place, one protester, an elderly lady, was trampled by a police horse, and one conservative female reporter was beaten by police and shot with a tear gas canister. 

Trudeau revoked the EA on February 23. 

In the lead-up to the protest, Trudeau had disparaged unvaccinated Canadians, saying those opposing his measures were of a “small, fringe minority” who hold “unacceptable views” and do not “represent the views of Canadians who have been there for each other.”      

In another Freedom Convoy court battle, protest leaders Tamara Lich and Chris Barber underwent a year-long criminal trial which concluded last September.

Both Lich and Barber will have their verdicts announced on March 12, 2025, as LifeSiteNews has reported.

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
COVID-19 / 4 hours ago

Tamara Lich and Chris Barber trial update: The Longest Mischief Trial of All Time continues..

Energy / 6 hours ago

Straits of Mackinac Tunnel for Line 5 Pipeline to get “accelerated review”: US Army Corps of Engineers

John Stossel / 6 hours ago

Climate Change Myths Part 1: Polar Bears, Arctic Ice, and Food Shortages

COVID-19

Tamara Lich and Chris Barber trial update: The Longest Mischief Trial of All Time continues..

Published on April 17, 2025

By

Here are the last two posts on Tamara Lich’s Substack posted April 16 and April 17:

April 17: 

We weren’t able to secure a date yesterday for the sentencing hearing and instead another ‘speak to’ was set for April 28. In addition to time needed to enter numerous impact statements (coincidentally and conveniently comprised of individuals suing us for $300,000,000.00), the Crown has added a forfeiture order to seize Big Red which will add significant time to argue. Therefore I suspect all parties will need to find 4-5 days in their schedules for the sentencing hearing.

The Crown is also seeking two years in federal prison for each of us.

Three days were tentatively set aside at the end of May for a Stay of Proceedings application put forth yesterday by Ms. Magus on Chris’ behalf.

And so The Longest Mischief Trial of All Time continues to plod along, still no end in sight.

 

April 16:

In our trial, the longest mischief trial of all time, we set hearing dates to set hearing dates.

There will be a ‘speak to’ this afternoon to set a date for the sentencing hearing which we think will take 3-4 days. Following that hearing, Chris and I will return to Ottawa again for the actual sentence.

The Crown is seeking 2 years in a federal penitentiary for both of us, plus they have decided to file an application to confiscate Big Red. Funny, there hasn’t been a single other convoy case in which the Crown demanded that persons property or vehicle, yet they seem to want Big Red. You need to ask yourself why.

Chris raised his children in that truck, changed their diapers in that truck, had his old dog, Buddy, put to sleep in the passenger seat when his time came because that was Buddy’s favourite place in the world.

This is not about the rule of law.

It’s about crushing a Canadian symbol of Hope, Pride & Unity

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Canadian student denied religious exemption for COVID jab takes tech school to court

Published on April 16, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

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.”

“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.

Continue Reading

Trending

X