COVID-19
Supreme Court of Canada Fails to Defend Freedom by Refusing to Hear Travel Mandate Cases
From The Opposition with Dan Knight
The Court’s Refusal to Hear Vaccine Mandate Challenges Shows a Troubling Endorsement of Government Overreach
Let’s call this what it is: a shocking abandonment of judicial duty and a blatant disregard for Canadians’ fundamental rights. The Supreme Court of Canada has just refused to hear two critical cases that challenged the federal COVID vaccine travel mandate. This isn’t just a legal technicality. It’s a clear message from the highest court in the land: “We’re not interested in defending your freedoms. We’d rather sidestep controversy and protect government overreach.”
The cases in question, Peckford et al. v. Canada and Hon. Maxime Bernier v. Canada, were crucial tests of the limits of government power. The Honourable Brian Peckford, the last living signer of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and Maxime Bernier, leader of the People’s Party of Canada, stood up to challenge the draconian mandates that the Trudeau government imposed. These mandates effectively barred unvaccinated Canadians from traveling — a blatant violation of mobility rights under the Charter. Yet, the Supreme Court has chosen to declare these cases “moot,” arguing that since the mandates have been lifted, there’s no point in reviewing their legality.
Judicial Evasion: A Dangerous Precedent
Let’s be clear: the court’s decision to duck out of these cases isn’t just a mistake; it’s a dangerous precedent. By labeling the cases moot, the Supreme Court has effectively allowed the government to evade scrutiny of its actions. This is nothing short of judicial cowardice. The government can impose sweeping restrictions, violate Charter rights, and then simply withdraw those measures to avoid legal accountability. It’s a dirty trick, and the Supreme Court just endorsed it.
Consider this: the vaccine mandate was not based on any scientific evidence or medical advice. This isn’t speculation; it’s fact. Under cross-examination, a government bureaucrat admitted as much. The mandate was a political decision, plain and simple, driven by the whims of Justin Trudeau and his Cabinet. And now, the Supreme Court has decided that Canadians don’t deserve to know whether these actions were lawful.
A Government Out of Control
At the heart of this issue is a government that believes it is above the law. The Trudeau administration imposed these mandates without proper justification, effectively restricting the movement of millions of Canadians and trampling on their rights. The Minister of Transport even threatened to reinstate the mandates “without hesitation” — an ominous warning that should have alarmed every freedom-loving citizen.
The applicants in these cases argued that the doctrine of mootness should not apply when emergency orders are designed to evade judicial review. They were right. Emergency orders, unlike legislation, are decreed by the Cabinet and protected by Cabinet privilege. This means Canadians are kept in the dark about the real reasons behind these decisions. The Supreme Court had a duty to shine a light on this abuse of power, but it chose darkness instead.
A Call to Action
This decision isn’t just a legal defeat; it’s a moral failure. It’s a signal that in Canada, your rights can be violated, and the government won’t be held accountable. Canadians should be outraged. If the courts won’t defend our freedoms, who will? The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms has been one of the few voices standing up for Canadians’ rights, but they can’t do it alone. It’s time for every Canadian to demand better — from their government, from their courts, and from their country.
We cannot allow this to stand. The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear these cases damages not just the legal system but the very fabric of Canadian democracy. This is not the end of the fight; it is only the beginning. The question remains: will Canada continue down this path of unchecked government overreach, or will the people rise up to reclaim their rights?
One thing is clear: the stakes have never been higher. We must hold our leaders and our courts accountable. Freedom is not just a word — it’s a way of life. And it’s a way of life that’s worth fighting for.
For the full experience subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .
Dr. Shimabukuro implicated in concealing an 82% miscarriage rate among COVID-19 vaccinated pregnant women in NEJM study — records reportedly “remain lost.”
The New York Post has just reported:
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention doctor in charge of monitoring reports of adverse COVID-19 vaccine reactions has been accused by a Republican senator of mishandling and possibly deleting key records.
Officials at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) struggled to find records belonging to Dr. Tom Shimabukuro, the director of the CDC’s Immunization Safety Office, while trying to comply with a subpoena from Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) for vaccine safety data.
“HHS officials recently informed me that Dr. Shimabukuro’s records remain lost and, potentially, removed from HHS’s email system altogether,” Johnson wrote in a Wednesday letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel and acting HHS watchdog Juliet Hodgkins.
“Any attempt to obstruct or interfere with my investigatory efforts would be grounds for contempt of Congress,” Johnson wrote Wednesday.
Contempt of Congress is punishable by up to a six-figure fine and 12 months in prison.
Under the Federal Records Act, government officials are required to preserve materials “made or received by a Federal agency under Federal law or in connection with the transaction of public business.”
Johnson is calling upon the FBI, DOJ and HHS Inspector General’s Office to probe whether Shimabukuro and other federal health officials “deleted or destroyed official agency records.”
Dr. Shimabukuro is the first author on fraudulent study published in The New England Journal of Medicine paper titled, Preliminary Findings of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Persons:
 |
A study by Thorp et al comprehensively exposes how Shimabukuro et al manipulated the data to make the mRNA shots appear safe for pregnant women. Re-analysis of the data revealed an astonishing 82% spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) rate in COVID-19 vaccinated pregnant women:
The most blatant example of data-doctoring, eerily similar to the fraudulent Pfizer study conducted during the same time frame, was published by NEJM in June, 2021 [85]. In a study intended to evaluate vaccine safety during pregnancy, Shimabukuro et al. followed outcomes in 3958 vaccinated pregnant women between mid-December 2020 and the end of February 2021.
During the two and-a-half-month period 827 women completed their pregnancy of which 712 (86.1%) were live births and 115 (13.9%) pregnancy losses. Of the pregnancy losses, 104 were spontaneous abortions the vast majority of which (92.3%) occurred before 13 weeks of gestation.
Upon review of the data, however, 700 (84.6%) of women weren’t vaccinated until the third trimester, long after the spontaneous abortions would have occurred. Nonetheless, authors included these 700 third-trimester vaccinations in the denominator when they calculated the spontaneous abortion rate.
Based on their statistical sleight-of-hand, authors pegged the spontaneous abortion rate at 12.6% (104/827) when, in fact, it was actually 82% (104/127). This astonishing miscarriage rate is equivalent to the efficacy of the so-called abortion pill, RU486, which carries an FDA black box warning to alert consumers to major drug risks.
And yet Shimabukuro et al. concluded there were no obvious safety concerns. This is disinformation plain and simple and cannot be written off as accident. There were 21 named authors on the study, 8 of whom were physicians, including 3 Ob-Gyn specialists, and others with expertise in public health and epidemiology. It is inconceivable that an error of this magnitude could escape the scrutiny of such a stellar cast. And how could it have been overlooked by the NEJM editorial staff and reviewers unless by intention?
Provocatively, all 21 authors report affiliations with either CDC or the FDA. And NEJM, the flagship journal of the medical-industrial complex, has taken a strong pro-vax stance that can hardly be called objective. Shimabukuro’s thinly-veiled attempt to downplay the risks of COVID-19 vaccines and mitigate vaccine hesitancy is yet another research scandal laden with conflicts of interest and intent to deceive.
This may explain why Dr. Shimabukuro would seek to obscure or delete records. His potential involvement in the deliberate manipulation of critical safety data on COVID-19 mRNA injections during pregnancy carries grave implications—resulting in immeasurable harm to mothers and their unborn children worldwide.
Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation
Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.
Subscribe to FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse).
For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
From LifeSiteNews
The filings urge state prosecutors to open criminal investigations into Dr. Anthony Fauci and other prominent officials for alleged crimes committed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
On April 8, 2025, the Vires Law Group, in collaboration with the Former Feds Group Freedom Foundation, submitted formal criminal referral requests to the Attorneys General of Arizona and Pennsylvania. These filings urge state prosecutors to open criminal investigations into Dr. Anthony Fauci and other prominent public health and government officials for alleged crimes committed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The referrals are based on detailed evidence—including the stories of over 80 victims and families—and allege that policies such as lethal hospital protocols, the denial of life-saving treatments, and systemic medical coercion led to widespread injury and death.
Similar filings have been submitted on behalf of constituents in Florida, Louisiana, Texas, Missouri, and Oklahoma, marking a coordinated nationwide effort to pursue justice through state and local authorities:
Individuals Named in the Referral Requests:
- Dr. Anthony Fauci – Former Director, NIAID
- Dr. Cliff Lane – Deputy Director, NIAID
- Dr. Francis Collins – Former Director, NIH
- Dr. Deborah Birx – Former White House COVID Response Coordinator
- Dr. Rochelle Walensky – Former Director, CDC
- Dr. Stephen Hahn – Former Commissioner, FDA
- Dr. Janet Woodcock – Principal Deputy Commissioner, FDA (Arizona only)
- Dr. Peter Hotez – Dean, National School of Tropical Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine (Arizona only)
- Dr. Robert Redfield – Former Director, CDC
- Dr. Peter Daszak – President, EcoHealth Alliance
- Dr. Ralph Baric – Professor, University of North Carolina
- Dr. Rick Bright – Former Director, BARDA
- Administrators and healthcare providers at various hospital systems and care facilities in Arizona and Pennsylvania
Combined List of Alleged Crimes Across Both States:
- Murder
- Involuntary Manslaughter
- Negligent Homicide
- Assault / Aggravated Assault / Simple Assault
- Recklessly Endangering Another Person
- Vulnerable Adult Abuse / Emotional Abuse
- Neglect and Abuse of a Care-Dependent Person
- Kidnapping
- Trafficking of Persons for Forced Labor or Services
- Criminal Coercion to Restrict Another’s Freedom
- Operating a Corrupt Organization
- Violations of State Anti-Racketeering Laws
- Terrorism
At the time of the release, two county-level criminal investigations are reportedly already underway in other states. The legal teams and victims involved assert that accountability must come through state or local prosecution, given the lack of federal action. These filings represent a significant national effort to seek justice on behalf of families who lost loved ones and were denied proper care during the pandemic.
Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation
Reprinted with permission from Focal Points.
Mortgage Mayhem: How Rising Interest Rates Are Squeezing Alberta Homeowners
Trump eyes end of capital gains tax in 2025
Mark Carney Comes to B.C. and Delivers a Masterclass in Liberal Arrogance
Poilievre to invest in recovery, cut off federal funding for opioids and defund drug dens
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoResearchers Link China’s Intelligence and Elite Influence Arms to B.C. Government, Liberal Party, and Trudeau-Appointed Senator
-
Business2 days agoTimeline: Panama Canal Politics, Policy, and Tensions
-
COVID-192 days ago
Fauci, top COVID officials have criminal referral requests filed against them in 7 states
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoPoilievre Announces Plan To Cut Taxes By $100,000 Per Home
-
Health2 days agoRed Deer Hospital Lottery – Previous Supporter Draw Deadline!
-
Health2 days agoRFK Jr. Shuts Down Measles Scare in His First Network Interview as HHS Secretary
-
International2 days agoTrump White House will ignore reporter emails that include ‘preferred pronouns’ in signature
-
Bjorn Lomborg2 days agoThe stupidity of Net Zero | Bjorn Lomborg on how climate alarmism leads to economic crisis