PKB: Court cases against “vaccination” mandates and measures
"Plandemic" Knowledge Base Topic
← Back to "Plandemic" Knowledge Base
EU:
“EU prosecutor’s office opens investigation into COVID vaccine purchases” (2022.10.15):
The European Public Prosecutor’s Office has opened an investigation into the EU's coronavirus vaccine purchases, an announcement that will refocus attention on European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen's role in the matter.
Canada:
“Arbitrator rules in favour of Ont. nurses fired for refusing COVID vaccines” (CTV News, 2024.03.05):
An arbitrator has ruled that nine Ontario nurses, who were fired because they didn’t get 2 COVID-19 vaccinations, should be reinstated, because their termination was “unreasonable.”
“Nurses intent on remaining unvaccinated are a small minority everywhere but their employee rights may not be ignored" wrote James Hayes, in his decision published March 1.
In a statement from Quinte Health, Catherine Walker, the manager of Communications and Community relations, wrote to CTV News:
"Like many Ontario hospitals, Quinte Health put in place a mandatory vaccine policy during the pandemic as a proactive measure to protect healthcare workers, prevent transmission, maintain healthcare capacity, promote public health, and fulfill our ethical obligation to prioritize patient safety and well-being. The decision …..concluded the impacted nurses should have been put on an unpaid leave of absence. Quinte Health respects the arbitrator’s ruling and will work with our ONA partners on next steps.”
“B.C. health care workers file class-action lawsuit against Dr. Bonnie Henry over COVID mandates” (Rebel News, 2023.11.13)
“Trudeau regime puts Canadian detective on trial for investigating link between infant deaths and mRNA vaccines” (Christopher Brunet, 2023.10.11)
“Nova Scotia judge launches $5M lawsuit over dispute related to COVID-19 vaccination” (CBC, 2023.10.06):
According to Brinton's lawsuit, in September 2021, Chief Judge Pamela Williams emailed provincial court judges in the midst of the pandemic to ask them if they'd be prepared to reveal their vaccination status.
As a compromise, Brinton proposed she frequently self-test for COVID. Williams reportedly dismissed that idea because it was not an option available to everyone. Williams proposed that Brinton could preside over arraignments from her home, providing other judges take over her trials. Again, according to the lawsuit, other judges were unwilling to do that.
Twenty four days later, Williams issued a public statement, saying all presiding judges are fully vaccinated. In the meantime, Brinton and her family all tested positive for COVID and she underwent a 10-day quarantine period.
Then, according to her lawsuit, "Brinton found herself suffering from overwhelming exhaustion and anxiety arising from Williams's actions." Her doctor advised she go off work for four weeks and avoid reading work emails.
The lawsuit claims that Williams wrote directly to Brinton's doctor, asking about her medical status. The doctor did not disclose that information because Brinton had not approved it.
“Ontario regulatory body drops inquest into COVID-critical doctor” (National Post, 2023.10.04):
…it comes as a surprise that the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, which had been hellbent on bringing Gill to heel, has decided to end a planned disciplinary hearing against her. Lisa Bildy, Gill’s lawyer, said in an email that the CPSO seemed to concede it had a bad case.
“It appears they finally recognized that Dr. Gill’s concerns about the harms of lockdowns and vaccine mandates were well-supported and could not reasonably be said to constitute ‘misinformation,’” Bildy said.
“Regulatory bodies have become far too comfortable with exerting control over the expression and values of their members,” said Bildy. “The (CPSO) is legislatively tasked with keeping patients safe from incompetent and unethical doctors and regulating the profession in the public interest. It is not there to give disgruntled people on Twitter a tool for ‘cancelling’ people with whom they do not agree, nor to take up the mantle of enforcer for politicians who don’t want their policies challenged.”
Gill’s real crime, Bildy said, was refusing to go along with the “groupthink.” She pointed out that the CPSO’s statement to the profession, back when Gill was being investigated, told doctors their comments could lead to public harm if they did not “align with information coming from public health or government.”
“Manitoba churches appealing unjustified church closures to the Supreme Court of Canada” (JCCF, 2023.09.19):
The five Manitoba churches, including Gateway Bible Baptist Church, and two individuals, including Pastor Tobias Tissen, have challenged the church closures, citing Charter breaches of their religious freedoms and freedoms to assemble and express themselves. A protester, Ross MacKay, challenged the limits on his ability to gather outdoors after he was ticketed. The province of Manitoba has admitted to violating the Applicants’ Charter rights to worship, express themselves, and assemble. Without explaining how or why the government’s evidence might be more persuasive than the Applicant’s evidence in the expert report of the former Chief Public Health Officer of Manitoba, Dr. Joel Kettner, the lower courts ruled that the violations of these Charter rights were justified under section 1 of the Charter.
The case was heard before the Manitoba Court of King’s Bench in May 2021. Chief Justice Glenn Joyal ruled in favour of the province, finding that the Charterviolations were justified under section 1. In a separate motion for costs brought by the government, he did not order the Applicants to pay court costs, as he found the public interest in having the case adjudicated was significant. The Applicants appealed before the Manitoba Court of Appeal in December 2022. Their appeal was dismissed in June 2023.
On September 18, 2023, the Applicants filed an Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC). They argue that the case raises issues of national importance that warrant the SCC to hear the case:
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 (eg. In-person religious worship) while permitting comparable non-Charter-protected activities (eg. 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?
“CPSO drops disciplinary proceedings against Ontario physician for opposing harmful Covid policies” (The Democracy Fund, 2023.09.14):
The Democracy Fund (TDF) is pleased to announce that disciplinary proceedings against Dr. Kulvinder Kaur Gill, scheduled for a 15-day fully-contested hearing in early 2024, have been withdrawn by her regulator, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO).
“External review found military's COVID-19 vaccine policy violated Charter of Rights” (CBC, 2023.08.02):
The external review committee made findings in three grievance cases at the end of May. The committee concluded that the policy infringed the rights protected under Section 7 of the Charter, which guarantees life, liberty and security of the person. It found the limitations on these rights were not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. The tribunal also determined that the limitations were not justified under Section 1 of the Charter, which states that rights and freedoms are subject to reasonable limits.
“Alberta court strikes down Hinshaw's public health orders that violated Charter freedoms” (JCCF, 2023.08.01)
“ArriveCAN Mootness Appeal Dismissed” (JCCF, 2023.07.19):
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is disappointed with the Federal Court’s decision in the matter of Yates et al v. Canada, a constitutional challenge to the mandatory use of the ArriveCAN app, which was released on July 19th 2023, where the Court found no errors in the Motion Judge’s decision that the Application was moot. The decision will be reviewed thoroughly, and an update will be provided in due course with respect to potential next steps.
“Canadian military board rules COVID jab mandate violated rights of fired service member” (LifeSite News, 2023.07.06):
“The Committee concluded that the policy infringed on the rights protected under Section 7 of the Charter [of Rights and Freedoms] and that the limitations of these rights were not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. The Committee viewed some aspects of the policy as arbitrary and overly broad, and its implementation as disproportionate,” affirmed the ruling.
“Hundreds of military personnel part of lawsuit over mandatory COVID vaccine policy” (Ottawa Citizen, 2023.06.26):
The court action demands $1,000,000 in damages for each plaintiff, plus acknowledgement that CAF members had their rights violated
“Christine Van Geyn: College of Psychologists attacks Jordan Peterson in court” (National Post, 2023.06.26):
During the hearing, the lawyers hired by the College of Psychologists made great hay of the controversy of those statements by Dr. Peterson, which were no doubt controversial. While arguing with Trudeau’s former chief of staff and an Ottawa city councillor, Dr. Peterson used rude epithets. He called the physician who performed gender affirming surgery on transgender actor Elliot Page “criminal” and “deadnamed” him using female pronouns and his pre-transition name. Dr. Peterson made comments about the changing nature of aesthetic beauty by referring to a plus size model as “not beautiful.” But he also was unfairly taken to task for a joke pointing out the hypocrisy of western progressive climate activists for ignoring harm to “poor children” and for describing a former client as “vindictive” because she had made false allegations against him — allegations for which he was exonerated by the college.
There is no right not to be offended, and the potential to offend does not mean any harm has been caused. None of the people Dr. Peterson was commenting on were the source of the complaints. The complaints were mostly made informally by strangers to Dr. Peterson, who had tagged the college on Twitter. In two cases, formal complaints were made by people falsely claiming to be current or former clients of Dr. Peterson’s.
The regulator’s lawyers’ listing of Dr. Peterson’s comments in court, and emphasizing how caustic or rude they may be, is a classic tactic of any government trying to suppress speech. It is always government’s argument that the speech they seek to silence is of little value and not worthy of protection. But freedom of expression isn’t needed to protect popular speech. Speech that can offend is not at the periphery of protection. And when it engages political and social issues, it is at the core of freedom of expression even if it is caustic or rude. We cannot lose sight of that.
“Professional misconduct accusations withdrawn against nurse who shared information about Covid-19 vaccinations” (JCCF, 2023.04.05):
The complaint also alleged that she had unlawfully breached the health authority’s privacy policy by disclosing instances where mass Covid-19 vaccination clinics had resulted in significant numbers of vaccination injuries, including serious injuries requiring multiple ambulances to be called to the vaccination clinic.
“Canadian nurses deserve better than to be threatened with discipline for telling the truth to the public,” said Mr. Pridgen. “Professional regulators must stop this nation-wide inquisition against doctors and nurses who simply choose to uphold their ethical obligations to obtain meaningful informed consent”, he further added.
“A Manitoba family has launched a lawsuit alleging their 23-year-old son had a stroke days after receiving a dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, leaving him legally blind.” (CTV News, 2023.03.29)
“A Dangerous Double Standard Appears to Be at Play in Canada’s Justice System” (The Epoch Times, 2023.02.05):
As criminal justice cases related to the COVID-19 pandemic and citizens’ responses to it make their way through Canada’s agonizingly slow justice system, a disturbing trend of possible judicial bias appears to be emerging. The double standard being applied to prosecutions linked to any form of protests against pandemic restrictions is stark and disturbing. The examples are growing:
In a recent article in the Western Standard, it was reported that Crown counsel would not approve the pursuit of charges against a man who used a bicycle as a weapon and attacked a vehicle and the passenger inside it during a protest against pandemic mandates on March 28, 2021. The B.C. prosecution service told the Standard they determined a conviction wouldn’t be likely in the case. The video evidence from the incident makes the statement from the prosecution service rather hard to believe. A man is clearly seen repeatedly approaching a vehicle and smashing it and the person on the passenger side with his bicycle, until ultimately breaking the glass when the passenger rolled up the window. It was a dangerous act causing substantial damage to the vehicle and could have seriously injured the passenger. The aggressor was apparently taken into custody at the time and police recommended charges of mischief and assault with a weapon. It beggars belief that somebody could view that video and feel a conviction would be unlikely. The person demonstrated clear violent tendencies, and it should be incumbent on the justice system to follow up on this if only to try to prevent a future incident. The man in the video needs to face consequences and perhaps has some mental health issues that should be addressed, yet he faced no sanction. This sends a signal to extreme-minded people that they can get violent with some protesters, as long as the protesters they attack are in opposition to government restrictions. A dangerous precedent to set, to say the least.
In another case, Stephanie Warriner was viciously restrained by security staff in a hospital for her refusal to wear a mask correctly. A recently released video horrifyingly shows several security guards grabbing the woman and pulling her behind a pillar. The camera is then turned away by another security worker who was remotely operating the camera. The next portion of the video shows the woman being wheeled away limp and motionless. She never regained consciousness and died days later. Charges of manslaughter were laid against two of the guards, but they were dismissed on Nov. 22, 2022, by Superior Court Justice Sean Dunphy. Warriner was a slight woman who had breathing challenges. The actions of the security guards certainly warranted a day in court to take a deep dive into what happened and why.
On the other side of the coin, Canada is more than willing to use the full force of the law against people charged with protesting against government pandemic restrictions:
Tamara Lich remains in legal limbo as she awaits her trial. Lich spent a total of 48 days in custody following her arrest in Ottawa during the Freedom Convoy protests. It took weeks of legal wrangling for her to get bail initially. Then, due to her having dared to pose in a picture with the wrong people, homicide detectives were assigned to fly across the country to re-arrest Lich and fly her back to Ottawa to be returned to jail for bail violations. Lich was ultimately released on bail again, but the dedication and zeal committed to incarcerating a non-violent woman with no prior criminal history were unprecedented. Lich presents no threat to society while awaiting trial, and the efforts to keep her behind bars appear to have been driven by political motivation rather than public safety.
While bail is difficult to obtain for peaceful protesters, it appears to be ridiculously easy to get for known violent offenders and it has led to tragic consequences:
OPP Const. Grzegorz (Greg) Pierzchala was murdered in cold blood on Dec. 27, 2022. The alleged killer had been released on bail after having been charged with multiple violent offences, including assaulting a police officer.
Former CBC journalist Michael Finlay died on Jan. 31, 2023, a week after a random attack on a street in Toronto. The man suspected in the crime and being sought was recently released on bail after being charged with violent crimes.
Is it really that difficult to distinguish between violent and non-violent offenders when determining bail? The justice system is failing to keep the public safe, and it appears politicization of the process is a factor in the problem. There is a dangerous double standard at play and it must be rectified.
“Jordan Peterson launches court challenge as College of Psychologists attempts to pull licence over social media posts” (Toronto Sun, 2023.01.04)
“Proposed Class Action Against Bonnie Henry Begins” (Police on Guard for Thee, 2022.12.27):
The lawsuits continue to pile up against health authorities for their actions in battling SARS-CoV-2. This segment touches on the Class-Action certification hearings in British Columbia, where a group known as the Canadian Society for the Advancement of Science in Public Policy (CSASPP) have filed legal action against Dr Bonnie Henry. Due to provincial legislation in British Columbia, this type of hearing is required to certify a legal action as a Class Action Suit. Essentially, that means that a small group of representatives can represent a larger group of people who allege they have suffered similar damages from the action(s) of the defendant(s).
“Dr. Byram Bridle sues University of Guelph, their professors, and others for Tortious conduct against him” (the Constitutional Rights Centre, 2022.12.22)
Dr. Byram Bridle sues University of Guelph, their professors, and others for Tortious conduct against him.
“Unvaccinated woman wins employment insurance after feds tried to deny it” (The COunter Signal, 2022.12.21):
The woman, who worked in a healthcare setting in Ontario, was fired in November 2021 for not showing proof of vaccination.
The Canada Employment Insurance Commission (CEIC) had determined her firing was due to “misconduct,” which prohibited her from being eligible for employment insurance (EI) as per the Employment Insurance Act.
But Leonard said her employer failed to prove her behaviour was “misconduct” as required. He said it was not misconduct under the law, and the Employment Insurance Act “doesn’t say what misconduct means.”
“But case law (decisions from courts and tribunals) shows us how to determine whether the Claimant’s dismissal is misconduct under the Act,” Leonard stated.
One criterion to prove misconduct requires that “there must be a breach on an expressed or implied duty arising out of her employment contract.”
The appellant had not signed a contract with her employer that required Covid vaccination.
“Alberta Court of Appeal Upholds Covid-19 Vaccine Requirement for Transplant Candidates” (2022.11.08)":
The Justice Centre is disappointed that the Alberta Court of Appeal decided that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not apply to Alberta Health Services’ and Alberta transplant doctors’ Covid-19 vaccine policy for transplant candidates. Sheila Annette Lewis challenged AHS’ and her transplant doctors’ Covid-19 vaccine policy which required her to receive the Covid-19 vaccines before she could receive a life-saving transplant.
“SK Nurses College Drops Discipline Threat Against Nurse Expressing Counter-Narrative Views on Covid” (2022.11.07):
SASKATOON, SK: The Justice Centre is pleased to announce that the College of Registered Nurses of Saskatchewan (CRNS) has abandoned its attempts to discipline nurse Shelley Wilson. Shelley Wilson is an experienced Nurse Practitioner serving southern Saskatchewan, where she offers clinical services to rural communities suffering healthcare shortages, especially due to a lack of physicians. In 2021, Shelley Wilson had expressed views on social media regarding Covid-19 vaccines, masks, and treatment options, which did not accord with public health or mainstream media narratives. The CRNS proposed that Shelley Wilson “voluntarily” enter into an agreement which required her to admit that her expression amounted to professional misconduct, with the looming threat that if she did not agree, she could be referred to the discipline committee for an oral hearing.
“Court dismisses air travel vaccine mandate lawsuits as moot” (True North, 2022.10.21):
The Federal Court will not hear challenges against the federal government’s vaccine mandate for air travel after dismissing them as moot.
On Thursday, Associate Chief Justice Jocelyne Gagné granted the federal government’s application to dismiss the case, 10 days before it was scheduled to be argued before the Federal Court.
The court was going to hear challenges filed by several applicants, including former Newfoundland premier Brian Peckford, People’s Party of Canada leader Maxime Bernier, and private citizens who were unable to travel by rail or air when the federal vaccine mandate was in effect.
The Trudeau government imposed the mandate by order-in-council in October 2021. It suspended the mandate June 20, but made clear it could be reinstated if the Covid situation in Canada changed.
Canada’s attorney general filed a motion to dismiss the case, arguing that it was moot given the vaccine mandate was no longer in effect.
Lawyers representing those challenging the mandate argued that the government’s own messaging about the potentially temporary suspension made the issue relevant so they wouldn’t need to start from scratch in challenging a future mandate.
Justice Gagné has not yet issued reasons for her decision, but did grant the government’s motion.
2022.10.29: Federal Judge Releases Reasons for Rejecting Travel Vaccine Mandate Lawsuits. Claims "There is no important public interest", also "the court should not prevent or dictate future government actions".
A B.C. judge has ruled that a lawsuit opposing federal and provincial COVID-19 restrictions can not proceed in its current form (CTV News, 2022.09.04), noting its claims of "global conspiracies" and "crimes against humanity" can't be adjudicated in civil court.
However, Justice Alan Ross declined to dismiss the case in its entirety and instead ruled that the plaintiffs can – individually or as a group – amend the claim. "Put simply, individuals have standing to question whether state actions infringe their Charter protected rights. Hence, in this case, there is a prospect that the plaintiffs could put forward a valid claim that certain of the COVID-based health restrictions instituted by the Federal or Provincial governments infringed their Charter rights," he wrote. "The existence of a single potential, viable cause of action means that it would be improper for me, at this stage, to foreclose upon the plaintiffs’ right to bring their claims."
“Youth Cannot Be Mandated to Get COVID-19 Vaccine, Ontario Court Rules” (Epoch Times, 2022.08.17):
A 12-year-old girl who does not want to take the COVID-19 vaccine cannot be mandated to do so, an Ontario judge has ruled in a family court dispute.
“The science relating to COVID-19 is developing,” wrote Justice Christopher Corkery of the Ontario Superior Court. “The ‘facts’ are changing.”
The Justice also noted that, with informed consent, many factors should be considered in weighing the risks and benefits of receiving a vaccine. “Does safe mean there are no side effects?” Corkery wrote. “Is the vaccine effective in protecting her from contracting COVID-19, from spreading it, from dying from it, from severity of symptoms?” “Requiring her to be vaccinated against her will would not respect her physical, emotional and psychological safety, security and well-being but would in fact put her at risk of serious emotional and psychological harm.”
“Ottawa police detective allegedly sought links between COVID vaccine and child deaths” (Toronto Sun, 2022.08.09):
Investigators with the Ottawa Police Service’s professional standards unit allege Const. Helen Grus committed discreditable conduct when she took on a private investigative project to find the vaccination status of parents whose infants or children had died. On Jan. 30, 2022, Grus also allegedly interfered directly with an investigation into an infant’s death by contacting the father of a deceased baby to inquire about the mother’s COVID-19 vaccination status without the lead investigator’s knowledge
“Turek v. The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, 2021 ONSC 8105 (CanLII)” (2021.12.13):
With respect to the third request for a declaration, the Statement that the College issued on April 30, 2021 is not an instrument that can attract a declaration of invalidity. It is a guideline and a recommendation only. As such, it is not binding on any tribunal that may consider the matter further. The Applicant is not being investigated for breaching or violating the Statement; she is being investigated for professional misconduct and/or incompetence. If there is a hearing on the merits, and the Respondent College takes a position similar to the one outlined in the Statement or relies on the Statement, at that point the tribunal hearing the merits will have an opportunity to consider and rule upon whether the position taken in the Statement constitutes an unconstitutional violation of the Applicant’s free speech rights.
“Alberta Court of Appeal ruling that the injunction against Pastor Artur Pawlowski, his arrest, his jail time, the censorship order and fines against him were all illegal” (Rebel News, 2022.07.22):
“Catholic nurse had right to Covid shot exemption: Ontario arbitrator” (True North, 2022.07.20):
The nurse is a member of the Latin Mass Catholic community and had requested to be exempted from the city’s vaccine mandate, alleging that the vaccine had links to aborted preborn children.
Arbitrator Robert Herman stated that given the unnamed nurse holds a sincere belief that has a sufficient connection to her creed, “to get vaccinated would interfere with the exercise of her faith and her relationship with the divine.”
The arbitrator cited the 2004 Syndicat Northcrest c. Amselem Supreme Court decision, where it had ruled that in order for something to be considered religious discrimination, there has to be a connection or “nexus” to the person’s religious faith as well as a sincerity in that person’s beliefs.
“19 firefighters sue Calgary for $38 million over vaccine mandate” (True North, 2022.07.18):
A statement of claim to the Court of Queens Bench of Alberta details $2 million in damages for mental stress and Charter violations as well as violations under the Criminal Code. “By forcing its loyal employees to take experimental injections as a requisite to employment, the City has breached its legal duty to take reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm to its Employees contrary to section 217.1 of the Criminal Code of Canada,” the lawsuit reads.
“Judge rules doctors can require patient to receive Covid shot before life-saving transplant” (JCCF, 2022.07.12): “An Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench judge has ruled that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not apply to the decision of an organ transplant team, which requires candidates to be vaccinated for Covid prior to their organ transplant.”
“Cancelled Saskatchewan professor taking university and health authority to court” (True North, 2022.07.09): “Dr. Francis Christian was suspended from his job as a professor of surgery after he called Covid shots “experimental injections” and said vaccinations of children against Covid-19 should be halted. The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) has filed a claim on behalf of Christian challenging his suspension and termination from his teaching post.”
“Tamara Lich, arrested for allegedly breaching bail conditions” (Police on Guard for Thee, 2022.06.29): “ Ms. Lich attended the ceremony, along with her lawyers, and acknowledgement from Justice Phillips, that this would not be considered in breach of her conditions, knowing full well that she would be in close contact with other organizers. So, the questions to ask is, why does law enforcement feel that a breach was committed when this was already addressed in her bail review, and she was granted permission to attend?”
“Rocco Galati files Covid case against Bonnie Henry, John Horgan, Mike Farnsworth, Adrian Dix, and Others, including Trudeau/Tam” (Pudget Sound Radio, 2022.07.03):
“Court hearing today for Saskatchewan ban on outdoor protests” (JCCF, 2022.06.29): “From December 17, 2020 to May 30, 2021, Saskatchewan prohibited outdoor protests with more than 10 people, while allowing numerous public indoor gatherings to have at least three times as many people. For peacefully protesting and publicly expressing their opinions, Ms. Grandel and Mr. Mills were each issued $2800 fines. Ms. Grandel and Mr. Mills are two of dozens of individuals who have received tickets for peacefully protesting government restrictions. There is no evidence that police issued tickets to those protesting non-Covid related issues. For example, the Regina Police issued tickets to Ms. Grandel for numerous protests she attended in Regina, including protests with as few as 20 people in attendance. In contrast, on June 5, 2020, Regina Police Chief Evan Bray himself attended a large Black Lives Matter rally with hundreds of people and many other police officers, when the Government’s 10-person limit for outdoor gatherings was also in effect.”
“Emergencies Act inquiry will be show to watch in September” (Toronto Sun, 2022.06.28): “…the Commission got the federal government to agree to release all documents related to the controversial invoking of the Act. This is a big deal because earlier this year the feds used the argument of Cabinet confidentiality to not release the documents in a court case civil liberties groups commenced against them.
The Ontario Provincial Police and Ottawa police will also be there. As for other voices, they lean to those who have already stated their opposition to the invoking of the Act. These include the Canadian Constitution Foundation, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, constitutional expert Professor Ryan Alford and the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms.
”
“Metrolinx employees launch $2 million in claims over vaccine mandate, unpaid leave“ (2022.06.21): “Unless there is a government mandate that specifically requires that employees be vaccinated against COVID-19 (which hasn’t happened for provincially regulated transit workers), it is illegal for an employer to change fundamental aspects (pay, duties, work location) of an employee’s job, without their permission. This includes making vaccination a mandatory term of employment for someone whose contract does not require it. An employer does have the option of firing an employee who refuses to get vaccinated. But the termination would not be “for cause” – without severance and Employment Insurance – unless the company was enforcing a government vaccine mandate. Therefore the firing would be considered without cause, meaning that the employee would be owed as much as 24 months’ pay, depending on various factors. …“Metrolinx had been allowing people to work from home continuously since March 2020, and all of a sudden, my clients are no longer allowed to work at all because they did not agree to a vaccine policy that was never, ever required of them in their contracts,” said Fainzilberg. “That is… a very clear breach of (the employment) contract.””
“Federal Employee Lawsuit Statement of Claim Filed” (policeonguard.ca, 2022.06.17): “The Federal Employee Lawsuit, Statement of Claim has been filed by Constitutional Lawyer, Rocco Galati. Police on Guard spearheaded this lawsuit for everyone affected by these unconstitutional mandates. We had over 600 Plaintiffs, making it one of the largest lawsuits Rocco has undertaken.”
“Maxime Bernier and Brian Peckford to continue legal challenge against feds’ mandates“ (True North, 2022.06.14): “Despite the Trudeau government’s decision to suspend the vaccine mandate for domestic travel, People’s Party of Canada leader Maxime Bernier and former Premier of Newfoundland Brian Peckford say they will continue their legal challenge against the federal government’s vaccine mandates.“
“Feds refusing to compensate lost salaries of unvaccinated federal workers” (True North, 2022.06.16): “Several major unions including the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC), the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada (PIPSC) and the Canadian Association of Professional Employees (CAPE) have launched grievance actions on behalf of the impacted employees. According to CAPE President Greg Phillips, his union will also seek paid compensation for lost salaries of workers. “
(True North, 2022.06.15): “The Liberals have suspended their vaccine mandate for air and rail travel, but a constitutional challenge against the mandate by PPC leader Maxime Bernier and former Newfoundland premier Brian Peckford continues to prevent a similar mandate in the future. The lead counsel for the action, Keith Wilson, joins the Andrew Lawton Show to discuss. Also, Alberta United Conservative Party leadership candidate Rebecca Schulz joins to discuss her bid to become Premier of Alberta.”
“Federal public sector unions say vax mandate “now is unreasonable”“ (True North, 2022.05.22): “The Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada (PIPSC), the Canadian Association of Professional Employees (CAPE) and the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) have all filed grievances against the federal government on behalf of their members, as reported by the National Post.“
“Federal Court to hear challenge to Canada's COVID-19 vaccine requirement for travel“ (Castanet Net, 2022.05.12): “Constitutional lawyers are set to argue against the federal government’s mandatory COVID-19 vaccine requirements for air travellers. The action brought against the federal government will be heard Sept. 19 – 23 at the Federal Court of Canada, which resolves problems arising from applications of federal laws.“
“Fraser Valley woman has $5,750 COVID violation ticket dropped by Crown“ (Surrey Now-Lader, 2022.05.12): “An unnamed Chilliwack woman has had a $5,750 COVID ticket dropped by Crown counsel, according to the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF). When she arrived at the border, Ms. C was informed by government agents that she would have to submit to a PCR test,” according to the release. “Ms. C politely and respectfully declined, on grounds of bodily autonomy and personal health.“
“Vaccine backlash: Calgary oil giant facing dozens of lawsuits from former employees over COVID-19 shot“ (CTV News, 2022.04.23)
“University of Toronto (UoT) drops vaccine mandate after being hit with human rights complaint“ (Dr. Paul Alexander, 2022.04.05): https://canadianmale.wordpress.com/2022/03/30/university-of-toronto-drops-vaccine-mandate-after-being-hit-with-human-rights-complaint/
“Appealing a Court Decision Re: COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates“ (Dr. Byram Bridle, 2022.03.23): “I previously wrote about a court case in which an injunction was being sought for relief from a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for healthcare workers in Ontario (see the article here). The injunction was not granted. This case is now being appealed.
The Appellant filed affidavits from its impacted members, attesting to the fact that they saw no other real choice but to submit to vaccination to keep their employment. For these employees, some future determination of a labour arbitrator finding that the policy was indeed unlawful would be meaningless. For those who submitted to vaccination against their consent, the vaccination could not later be undone.
The Application Judge erred by narrowing the harm facing the Appellant’s
bargaining members as only the loss of income that would result from termination. The Application Judge entirely disregarded the real and substantial concerns for violations of bodily autonomy raised by the evidence before her. The Application Judge erred in concluding that because no one was being “forced” to be vaccinated, those who did submit to vaccination were doing so of their own free will. As will be shown in the Appellant’s argument, physical force is not required to establish a violation of a person’s consent. Such a strict interpretation does not accord with existing jurisprudence on informed consent. Consent to a medical treatment cannot be said to have occurred when a person is compelled through threat of job loss and duress to undergo such treatment.““COVID-19 'Vaccine' Mandates“ (Dr. Byram Bridle, 2022.02.08): “I recently served as an expert witness in an injunction hearing. Specifically, relief from the COVID-19 ‘vaccine’ mandate was being sought by hospital workers facing the loss of their jobs for not taking a jab that is, at best, irrelevant in the context of the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 and, at worst, enhances the risk of infection and disease and possibly even death due to COVID-19…“
“Charter challenge by 2 Ontario churches opposed to public health restrictions gets underway Monday“ (CBC, 2022.01.31): “A challenge by two Ontario churches of public health restrictions amid the COVID-19 pandemic begins Monday, with their lawyers arguing the measures violate the right to freedom of religion and assembly under the Constitution.”
“As unvaccinated workers sue for wrongful dismissal, Ottawa working on shielding employers“ (Global News, 2022.01.20): …lawsuits from fired unvaccinated workers are beginning to pile up — and the federal government's protections are nowhere to be seen. "We are seeing a huge amount of cases, claims, lawsuits involving terminations resulting from an individual's vaccine status," said Lior Samfiru, a Toronto employment lawyer and co-founder of Samfiru Tumarkin LLP."In fact, in my 20 years of practising law, I have not seen so many cases dealing with the same issue over such a short period of time."
“Three U of Winnipeg Collegiate instructors sue school, province over vaccine mandate“ (Global News, 2022.01.19): The three instructors contend the vaccine policy violates their Charter right to be protected from unreasonable search and seizures, including disclosing private medical information such as vaccine status or COVID-19 test results. “The policy seeks to coerce employees to be vaccinated against their will, without informed consent. The Policy amounts to an expressed intention to engage in a conspiracy to commit assault.” The instructors are asking for a stay of the U of W’s vaccine mandate until it can be reviewed by a judge. They are also asking for up to a million dollars in damages for the “intentional infliction of mental distress, and assault and battery,” and another million in damages for violating their Charter rights.
UK:
“Widower of BBC presenter who died after Covid jab says ‘no alternative’ but to sue AstraZeneca” (2023.04.14):
“UK Lawyer Anna de Buisseret with the police regarding jab injuries and Met Police investigation“ (VIDEO, Rumble, 2022.01.17): “She informs the constable of the ongoing Met police investigation, also the one registered in the International Criminal Court in the Hague, (ICC)“
“UK Team File Complaint of Crimes Against Humanity With The International Criminal Court” (The EXPOSE, 2021.12.10): “A complaint has been filed with the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court on December 6th, 2021 by a team from the UK on behalf of the people. They are alleging crimes committed by UK government officials and international world leaders of various violations of the Nuremberg Code, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression perpetrated against the peoples of the UK.“
USA:
2023.10.25: “Being vaccinated does not stop the spread of Covid-19” [so it’s an exercise in futility].
“Newsom repeals California law restricting doctors from freely sharing all COVID-19 information” (Washington Examiner, 2023.10.03)
“The White House's 'Misinformation' Pressure Campaign Was Unconstitutional | Opinion” (Newsweek, 2023.09.26)
The government's only attempted defense is that it was merely offering help to the platforms without jawboning them—"just your friendly neighborhood government agency." But the law is clear that even "significant encouragement" to censor protected speech—not just overt threats or coercion—is unconstitutional. We discovered that social media companies frequently tried to push back against government demands, before finally caving to relentless pressure and threats. The evidence we presented from 20,000 pages of communications between government and social media demonstrated both significant encouragement and coercion—as when Rob Flaherty, White House director of digital strategy, berated executives at Facebook and Google, dropping F-bombs, launching tirades, and browbeating the companies into submission—until they removed even a parody account satirizing President Joe Biden.
But the more insidious and powerful censorship happens when government pressures companies to change their terms of service and modify their algorithms to control what information goes viral and what information disappears down the memory hole. With sophisticated deboosting, shadowbanning, search results prioritization, and so forth, citizens do not even realize they are being silenced, and viewers remain unaware that their feeds are carefully curated by the government. Novelist Walter Kirn compared this to mixing a record: turn the volume up on this idea (more cowbell) and turn the volume down on that idea (less snare drum). The goal is complete top-down information control online.
CISA, the government's censorship switchboard and clearinghouse agency housed within the Department of Homeland Security, described its work as protecting our "cognitive infrastructure"—i.e., the thoughts inside your head—from bad ideas, such as the ones advanced in this article. (Not kidding: YouTube recently censored a video of our lawyers giving a talk on our censorship case.) These ideas aren't throttled by government censors because they are untrue, but because they are unwelcome. There's a more accurate term for the government's takeover of our "cognitive infrastructure": mind control. I don't know a single American of any political persuasion who wants to be subjected to that.
https://twitter.com/AaronSiriSG/status/1648064293198352389?s=20 (Aaron Siri, 2023.04.17):
Breaking news! Today, following an evidentiary hearing, we obtained an injunction requiring Mississippi to provide a religious exemption to its school vaccination requirements! https://sirillp.com/wp-content/upl
“Court blocks COVID-19 vaccine mandate for U.S. gov't workers” (CTV News, 2023.03.25):
U.S. President Joe Biden's order that federal employees get vaccinated against COVID-19 has been blocked by a federal appeals court. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, in a decision Thursday, rejected arguments that Biden, as the nation's chief executive, has the same authority as the CEO of a private corporation to require that employees be vaccinated. The ruling from the full appeals court, 16 full-time judges at the time the case was argued, reversed an earlier ruling by a three-judge 5th Circuit panel that had upheld the vaccination requirement.
The ruling maintains the status quo for federal employee vaccines. It upholds a preliminary injunction blocking the mandate issued by a federal judge in January 2022. At that point, the administration said nearly 98% of covered employees had been vaccinated.
“Judge Orders Biden Admin to Hand Over Communications With Tech Companies” (2022.11.10)
A federal judge ordered the Biden administration to hand over communication documents between the federal government and big tech companies. U.S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty, of the Western District of Louisiana, granted the order of discovery sought by Republican Attorneys General Eric Schmitt of Missouri and Jeff Landry of Louisiana.
President Joe Biden, members of his administration, and select social media companies must turn over documents and answer questions within the next 30 days during a discovery phase of a lawsuit alleging collusion to suppress freedom of speech, a court ruled. The attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri filed a lawsuit in May alleging Biden and eight high-ranking members of his administration and the government colluded with and/or coerced social media companies Meta, Twitter, and YouTube to suppress “disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content on social medial platforms.”
This is the way.I just had my first hearing before a workers’ compensation judge on a claim for an employer-mandated vaccine injury. The judge found sufficient evidence to proceed. Trial set for January. You can’t sue Pfizer, but you can bring a claim against your employer.
Ben Carlisle @BenCarlisleLaw“New York Supreme Court rules to rehire fired unvaccinated workers with back pay” (Childrens’ Health Defense, 2022.10.25):
In a huge victory for unvaccinated people everywhere, the Supreme Court of the state of New York has ordered that all unvaccinated workers who were fired must be rehired and given back pay. “All unvaccinated people, living or working in the City of New York are similarly situated. Granting exemptions for certain classes and selectively lifting of vaccination orders, while maintaining others, is simply the definition of disparate treatment.” “Either there is a mandate for all, or there is a mandate for none,” the judge added. The judge further noted that the vaccine doesn’t stop infection or transmission, and the CDC isolation guidelines don’t differentiate between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Additionally, the judge said US President Joe Biden declared the pandemic over.
“The FDA Misled the Public About Ivermectin and Should Be Accountable in Court, Argues AAPS” (AAPS, 2022.09.30):
The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) filed its motion and amicus brief Thursday evening with the federal district court in Galveston urging it to allow the lawsuit to proceed against the FDA for its misleading statements against ivermectin. In Apter v. HHS, a group of physicians sued to hold the Food and Drug Administration, a federal agency within the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), accountable for its interference with physicians’ ability to treat Covid-19. “Defendant FDA has improperly exploited misunderstandings about the legality and prevalence of off-label uses of medication, in order to mislead courts, state medical boards, and the public into thinking there is anything improper about off-label prescribing,” AAPS writes in its amicus brief to the court. “Not only is off-label prescribing fully proper, legal, and commonplace, but it is also absolutely necessary in order to give effective care to patients.”
“Jeffrey Tucker on Our Free Speech Lawsuit” (Aaron Kheriarty, 2022.09.08):
Judge orders discovery on communications from Anthony Fauci and White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre to social media companies
“A new lawsuit brought in a joint effort by The New Civil Liberties Alliance, the Attorney General of Missouri, and the Attorney General of Louisiana against the President of the United States” (The Postmillenial, 2022.09.01):
The suit is brought under the first amendment right to freedom of speech. The lawsuit seeks to identify among other things "all meetings with any Social-Media Platform relating to Content Modulation and/or Misinformation."
The discovery shows that there was "A recurring meeting usually entitled USG – Industry meeting, which has generally had a monthly cadence, and is between government agencies and private industry. Government participants have included CISA’s Election Security and Resilience team, DHS’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis, the FBI’s foreign influence task force, the Justice Department’s national security division, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Industry participants have included Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, Microsoft, Verizon Media, Pinterest, LinkedIn and the Wikimedia Foundation. Communications across 11 federal agencies reveal that the federal government, under the Biden administration, "has exerted tremendous pressure on social-media companies—pressure to which companies have repeatedly bowed," the New Civil Liberties Alliance details in a new release. The social media companies that were part of this Partner Support Portal include Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn. The CDC invited "all tech platforms" in to their meeting to discuss how to suppress free speech about Covid online.
“Over 50 Biden Administration Employees, 12 US Agencies Involved in Social Media Censorship Push: Documents” (The Epoch Times, 2022.09.01):
Over 50 officials in President Joe Biden’s administration across a dozen agencies have been involved with efforts to pressure Big Tech companies to crack down on alleged misinformation, according to documents released on Aug. 31. Senior officials in the U.S. government, including White House lawyer Dana Remus, deputy assistant to the president Rob Flaherty, and onetime White House senior COVID-19 adviser Andy Slavitt, have been in touch with one or more major social media companies to try to get the companies to tighten rules on allegedly false and misleading information on COVID-19, and take action against users who violate the rules, the documents show. In July 2021, for instance, after Biden said that Facebook was “killing people” by not combating misinformation effectively, an executive at Meta reached out to Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, a Biden appointee, to say that government and Meta teams met after the remarks “to better understand the scope of what the White House expects from us on misinformation going forward.”
“State AGs Amend Lawsuit to Force Biden Admin and Big Tech to Turn Over Evidence of 2016 Election Interference” (2022.09.01)
“NCLA Clients Join Missouri and Louisiana Suit Challenging Gov’t-Directed Social Media Censorship” (NCLA, 2022.08.02): “New Civil Liberties Alliance joined the lawsuit, State of Missouri ex rel. Schmitt, et al. v. Joseph R. Biden, Jr., et al., representing renowned epidemiologists and co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff, as well as Dr. Aaron Kheriaty and Jill Hines. Social media platforms, acting at the federal government’s behest, repeatedly censored NCLA’s clients for articulating views on those platforms in opposition to government-approved views on Covid-19 restrictions.”
“Judge blocks Air Force from expelling members who refuse COVID shot” (2022.07.15):
The judge determined the service members faced a “violation of their constitutional freedom” by the Air Force’s “clear policy of discrimination against religious accommodation requests.”
“On how things might unfold after a critical mass understands the US government’s mass control, maiming and murder program as such“ (Bailiwick News, 2022.06.30): Statutes that could be challenged in court and should be repealed by Congress as inherently unconstitutional and invalid include:
1983 Public Health Service Act Amendment. Added Public Health Emergencies (Section 319) to the 1944 Public Health Service Act and set the whole mess in motion.
1986 State Comprehensive Mental Health Services Plan Act. Established and funded a National Vaccine Program and granting vaccine manufactures legal immunity.
1997 National Defense Authorization Act for FY98 and 1997 Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act. Transferred the US government’s chemical and biological weapons program from DOD to HHS by creating the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) framework under the 1938 Federal Food Drug and Cosmetics Act.
1998 Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for FY1999. Established and funded the domestic bioweapons depot: Strategic National Stockpile program.
2000 Public Health Improvement Act - Title I, Public Health Threats and Emergencies Act. Reworked and expanded the 1983 Public Health Emergencies section. Appropriated funding and established a working group on bioterrorism ‘countermeasures’ research and development.
2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force - Construed as putting the United States in a permanent state of war (Global War on Terror) with no limitations in time or geographically.
2002 Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act
2004 Project Bioshield Act - Amended and expanded EUA laws. Eliminated Congressional and judicial oversight. Eliminated consumer protections and informed consent rights of human subjects. Established program for ‘qualified countermeasure’ research, procurement, contracting, manufacture, use and liability exemptions. Expanded HHS power to subject people to apprehension and indefinite detention on communicable disease predicates. Expanded coordination among Secretary of Health and Human Services, Secretary of Defense and Secretary of Homeland Security.
2005 Department of Defense, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act - Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act. Expanded HHS Secretary emergency powers, reduced judicial and Congressional checks, expanded liability shields for bioweapon/pharmaceutical product manufacturers.
2006 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act. Further consolidated and centralized HHS Secretary power, subordinated state, county, tribal and local public health and law enforcement systems to federal agencies, set up BARDA (Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority) division under HHS.
2007 National Institute of Health Reform Act - More reorganization, consolidation of power and funding.
2012 National Defense Authorization Act - Codified authority for US President to order military arrest and indefinite detention of Americans without charge or trial under 10 USC 801 and 2001 AUMF.
2013 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) - Authorized domestic deployment of propaganda by the US government, on the American population.
2013 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Reauthorization Act
2016 National Defense Authorization Act. Added ‘prototype’ contracting language to 10 USC 2371b, later renumbered 10 USC 4022, authorizing DOD to contract with pharmaceutical corporations to conduct otherwise illegal biological attacks on the American and global public without notice or consent.
2016 21st Century Cures Act - Authorized ‘real world evidence’ instead of valid clinical trials as grounds for FDA endorsement of general use of experimental products; authorized additional nullification of informed consent rights.
2017 Act to amend FDCA EUA statute, 21 USC 360bbb-3. Provided for “Additional Emergency Uses for Medical Products to Reduce Deaths and Severity of Injuries Caused by Agents of War”
2017 National Defense Authorization Act - Authorized DOD to conduct military operations on American soil and control American civilians in emergency situations involving Weapons of Mass Destruction, including biological weapons and materials.
2019 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act - Further consolidated federal power in HHS Secretary’s hands during public health emergencies, further merged public health and law enforcement systems, and further subordinated state, tribal, county and municipal governments and American civilians to direct federal control.
2020 Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act- Appropriated $8.3 billion to Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute of Health, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Food and Drug Administration, Small Business Administration, Department of State and US Agency for International Development, for research and development of vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics and other Covid programs.
2020 Families First Coronavirus Response Act. Appropriated $3.5 billion for Covid mass testing.
2020 Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act - Appropriated $2.2 trillion to kill small and medium-sized businesses and promote universal dependence on federal government for basic necessities. Appropriated $10 billion for “Operation Warp Speed.”
2020 Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act -Appropriated $75 billion for Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund (first funded in 2005), “to remain available until expended, to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus, domestically or internationally” plus $25 billion for research, development and deployment of Covid-19 tests.
2020 Consolidated Appropriations Act - $2.3 trillion spending bill, including $900 billion for Covid programs.
2021 Orange Book Transparency Act - Amended patent law under Federal Food Drug and Cosmetics Act, (21 USC 9)
2022 Consolidated Appropriations Act - Passed Congress March 15, 2022. $1,274,678,000 for the Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund (first funded in 2005). $780,000,000 for new domestic bioweapons production, classified as ‘security countermeasures;’ $845,000,000 to stock the Strategic National Stockpile, established 1998, controlled by the CDC within HHS 42 USC 247d-6b(a); $300,000,000 “to prepare for or respond to an influenza pandemic,” including federally-funded construction or renovation of privately-owned pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities, if the Secretary of Health and Human Services finds such construction or renovation necessary; $1,000,000,000 to establish ARPA-H: Advanced Research Program Agency - Health, to conduct research and development of bioweapons misbranded as public health measures; $3,880,000,000 to US Agency for International Development (US-AID) for programs mislabeled as ‘Global Health Programs,’ including immunization programs, HIV/AIDS programs, The GAVI Alliance [population-control zealot Bill Gates’ Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization] and a multilateral vaccine development partnership, for, among other projects, “experimental contraceptive drugs, devices and medical procedures.”
“Enforcement of Biden's Federal Employee COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate Is Delayed—Again” (Government Executive, 2022.06.27): “A federal appeals court will rehear the case this fall in front of its full panel of its judges. The three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit reversed that judge’s decision in a 2-1 ruling in April, but enforcement was stalled due to a standard buffer period. The mandate was set to go back into effect in May, but a petition from those challenging the mandate for a rehearing from the entire 5th Circuit further delayed the Biden administration from taking action on employees out of compliance with the requirement. Now, the mandate is stayed until at least mid-September when the full court rehears the case.”
“ College Mandates Strike Back!“ (VIDEO, Odyssey, 2022.06.23): “ As college students throughout the country enjoy the beginning of their summer break, universities are gearing up to mandate another round of ineffective and dangerous COVID vaccine boosters when they return in the Fall. What are students doing to stop this? Civil Rights Attorney Warner Mendenhall joins students, Ben Lipp of the University of Cincinnati and Tyce Patt of the Ohio University College of Business, to discuss their lawsuits against the COVID vaccine and booster mandates.”
“Federal Judge Strikes Down Mask Mandate for Planes and Public Transit“ (2022.04.19)
“Twitter suffers a devastating 9th Circuit defeat“ (Alex Berenson, 2022.03.04): “Because First Amendment, which Twitter appeared to think protects it from any and all legal and governmental scrutiny. Things have not gone as planned for the lil bird.“
“Pfizer, FDA Lose Bid to Further Delay Release of COVID Vaccine Safety Data“ (Children’s Health Defense, 2022.02.07)
“A federal district court in Texas has blocked the last Biden vaccine mandate, on federal employees” (Alex Berenson, 2022.01.21): Judge Jeffrey Vincent Brown upheld a suit from federal workers who are refusing to be vaccinated against Covid:
“The motion is GRANTED as to Executive Order 14043. All the defendants, except the President, are thus enjoined from implementing or enforcing Executive Order 14043 until this case is resolved on the merits.” Brown’s ruling said it was a “bridge too far” to let the president, “with the stroke of a pen and without the input of Congress, require millions of federal employees to undergo a medical procedure as a condition of their employment.”“U.S. Supreme Court rejects Biden’s vaccine mandate for large businesses“ (Global News, 2022.01.13)
New Zealand
New Zealand High Court ENDS Jacinda Ardern’s Vaccine Mandate: “It’s a Gross Violation of Human Rights” (The Epoch Times, 2022.02.26):
The landmark case means that the police and NZDF cannot be fired for refusing to take the experimental vaccine. This case will be used to overthrow all of Ardern’s illegal mandates in New Zealand.
…Justice Cooke also agreed with the claim that the mandate impinged on the right to decline a medical procedure.
The judge said that while it’s clear the government isn’t forcing Police and NZDF employees to get vaccinated against their will and they still have the right to refuse vaccination, the mandate presents an element of pressure.
“The associated pressure to surrender employment involves a limit on the right to retain that employment, which the above principles suggest can be thought of as an important right or interest recognised not only in domestic law, but in the international instruments,” Justice Cooke stated.New Zealand High Court: Vaccine Mandate Not ‘Demonstrably Justified,’ Breach of Rights (2022.02.25) https://www.scribd.com/document/561158050/Yardley-v-Minister-for-Workplace-Relations-and-Safety#from_embed
Enter your suggestions in the comments section below.