Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Sympthsical

(8,604 posts)
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 07:44 PM Feb 2022

Canadian Civil Liberties Association to sue federal government over Emergencies Act

I'm still a liberal who believes in civil liberties. Not going to give that up. That comes with the package, not when convenient.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ccla-lawsuit-emergencies-act-1.6355846

Mendelsohn acknowledged reports of "violent, racist and homophobic acts" occurring within the Ottawa protest but said the presence of those elements doesn't justify the introduction of measures the CCLA considers a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The act gives the federal government temporary powers to quell protests by, among other things, banning travel to protest zones and prohibiting people from bringing minors to unlawful assemblies. The act also allows the federal government to restrict protesters' access to bank accounts.

"Protest is how people in a democracy share their political messages of all kinds, whether they be environmental activists, students taking to the streets, Indigenous land defenders, workers on strike, people who know that Black lives matter, and others who oppose government measures of all kinds," Mendelsohn said.

"Not every person may agree with the content of every movement."


47 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Canadian Civil Liberties Association to sue federal government over Emergencies Act (Original Post) Sympthsical Feb 2022 OP
It's not a protest. It's a criminal blockade, infringement on rights of residents, interference,..nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2022 #1
Use as many shades as you wish to obscure Sympthsical Feb 2022 #3
Obscure what? You think I can park my car in your driveway because I protest your "__" sign? Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2022 #5
You may have forgotten that blocking traffic was common in the anti-Iraq war protests. former9thward Feb 2022 #12
Blocking traffic for an hour is different from blocking a whole downtown for weeks. Not comparable Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2022 #15
TY! No Excuses for the RW Truckers Cha Feb 2022 #21
Yea, well you aren't ForgedCrank Feb 2022 #32
Take a look at the attempted aspirations of a Jewish democratic cinematicdiversions Feb 2022 #45
So you would be okay with freezing the bank accounts cinematicdiversions Feb 2022 #40
False equation. Don't bother trying. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2022 #42
I can't go squat in your house bc I don't like your neighbor & call it a protest & no consequences.n Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2022 #2
No one said "No consequences" Sympthsical Feb 2022 #6
I think it is fine that CCLA is doing its job. I don't think they have a prayer of winning Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2022 #8
This message was self-deleted by its author MichMan Feb 2022 #34
Public Order Emergencies Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2022 #36
I think they should just hold back on that lawsuit until all the information is known Bev54 Feb 2022 #10
The protesters are attacking the police and trying to confiscate their weapons PortTack Feb 2022 #18
People at all levels have lost their damn minds over COVD protocols. Samrob Feb 2022 #4
Doesn't matter Sympthsical Feb 2022 #7
When night fell on the first day & the trucks were still blocking, it was no longer a protest. . .nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2022 #9
See post #18 PortTack Feb 2022 #19
This occupation used the vaccines as a guise but it is all about unseating our government Bev54 Feb 2022 #11
TY, Bev! Cha Feb 2022 #17
Exactly! PortTack Feb 2022 #20
Post removed Post removed Feb 2022 #33
It is the occupation and anti Trudeau rhetoric that they hoped would make the Liberal Bev54 Feb 2022 #35
This message was self-deleted by its author MichMan Feb 2022 #37
Hard to explain if you don't understand the system Bev54 Feb 2022 #38
Wrong. Rhetoric is no problem. Threats, provocations, weapons violations, etc are different Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2022 #44
Plus there were machinations about getting functionaries and/or GG to dissolve parliament Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2022 #43
Here's one for those protesters... 2naSalit Feb 2022 #13
I'm not even clear on why Disaffected Feb 2022 #14
They use the court injunction to give more severe penalties. It is one thing Bev54 Feb 2022 #23
OK but, Disaffected Feb 2022 #25
More severe penalties is what makes people leave, knowing there is more teeth Bev54 Feb 2022 #26
But they didn't need more severe penalties Disaffected Feb 2022 #28
I am not really sure you are getting what I am saying. It did work, they left the Bev54 Feb 2022 #29
OK, I see what you mean. Disaffected Feb 2022 #31
See, you get the argument Sympthsical Feb 2022 #41
It's really simply pro-forma... Spazito Feb 2022 #16
So it's okay for outside multi millionaires Kingofalldems Feb 2022 #22
That is a big problem and one people seem to ignore. I think our government knows Bev54 Feb 2022 #24
Is it ok on our side? Sympthsical Feb 2022 #47
Sorry but no. FelineOverlord Feb 2022 #27
I strongly disagreed with the ACLU on Citizens United. Crunchy Frog Feb 2022 #39
Over 100 Arrested FelineOverlord Feb 2022 #30
DURec leftstreet Feb 2022 #46

former9thward

(31,474 posts)
12. You may have forgotten that blocking traffic was common in the anti-Iraq war protests.
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 08:29 PM
Feb 2022

And depending on your age you may not remember the tactic was used in anti-Vietnam war protests. It was also used in the Floyd protests in 2020.

Bernardo de La Paz

(48,375 posts)
15. Blocking traffic for an hour is different from blocking a whole downtown for weeks. Not comparable
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 08:35 PM
Feb 2022

Further, I have never been in favor of blocking roads as a tactic. Why should other people's rights to freedom of movement be abrogated by people who can say the same things from the sidewalk?

Perhaps you've never been caught in a jam with important court papers for a deadline or a mother-to-be in labour or with a flight to catch to see a dying father? Fortunately I have not.

When innocent third parties have to suffer damages because of "free speakers" blockading roads, then it is not speech, it is criminal interference with third party rights.

I don't get to set up a tent and barbecue in your doctor's office because I want to protest the way you don't cut your grass on your lawn.

ForgedCrank

(1,645 posts)
32. Yea, well you aren't
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 10:24 PM
Feb 2022

going to make much headway having standards and convictions here, especially when you stick to them.
the people who agree with you won't post publicly because they get hammered like this.
Ask me how I know.
I got attacked from 35 different angles for suggesting the same thing a couple of days ago.
Some appear to be losing sight of what is right and wrong in the name of team loyalty. It is a bit troubling to see.

 

cinematicdiversions

(1,969 posts)
45. Take a look at the attempted aspirations of a Jewish democratic
Sat Feb 19, 2022, 11:02 AM
Feb 2022

Candidate early this week. Before we knew who the perp was people were literally calling for the suspect to be shot without trial.

Know we know it is crickets.

Sympthsical

(8,604 posts)
6. No one said "No consequences"
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 08:07 PM
Feb 2022

Civil disobedience almost requires consequences. Go in, ticket, arrest, tow. All would be completely normal things.

But a state assuming emergency powers then using those sweeping powers to retaliate for speech is an entirely different creature.

Anyway. It's going to be interesting to watch our side basically argue against Canada's version of the ACLU.

They're suing because they think it's an authoritarian reach.

I agree with them.

Bernardo de La Paz

(48,375 posts)
8. I think it is fine that CCLA is doing its job. I don't think they have a prayer of winning
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 08:19 PM
Feb 2022

Their job is to uphold civil liberties by testing them in court. They are doing that and it is good. Just don't bet on them winning because I don't think they have a leg to stand on. I think their line of attack has been already thought through and the rights balanced and safeguarded.

What the situation is about really is that many people's rights are being abridged by a few who are imposing unreasonable and excessive use of their own rights.

No right is absolute. Free speech does not give you the right to should "Fire" in a crowded theatre. Rights have to be balanced.



The blockaders have been given plenty of notice and lots of time. This is not retaliation for speech. Nobody can rationally argue that.

It is not an authoritarian overreach. Everything in the Act is subservient to the Charter of Rights. It says so right in the Act that it has to be that way.

The occupiers have had plenty of speech. More than adequate opportunity. By staying they aren't saying anything they didn't say on the first day.



Ball is in your court. I think you have to get rather specific about which action is specifically against which right and why and how other rights of other people don't have standing.

Response to Bernardo de La Paz (Reply #8)

Bernardo de La Paz

(48,375 posts)
36. Public Order Emergencies
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 10:54 PM
Feb 2022

Make of it what you will:

Public order emergency

Part II of the Emergencies Act describes "public order emergency" results from serious threats to the security of Canada. When defining "threats to the security of Canada" the act references the definition provided in the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, which includes espionage, sabotage, detrimental foreign influences, activities which support the threat or use of violence for a political, religious or ideological objective; or those activities which threaten to undermine or otherwise destroy, or overthrow the Government of Canada.[41][42] The Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act specifically notes that "lawful advocacy, protest or dissent" do not constitute "threats to the security of Canada".[43]

Section 18 of the Act states a public order emergency declaration persists for 30 days, subject to being extended through another proclamation, or ended earlier.[40]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergencies_Act

Bev54

(9,794 posts)
10. I think they should just hold back on that lawsuit until all the information is known
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 08:24 PM
Feb 2022

The Canadian intelligence knows things we are not yet privy to. The only way they could get tow truck drivers to go in without liability and banks to freeze funds without liability was to use the Emergency Act. Nobody brought in the military and nobody is being prevented from peacefully protesting anywhere in Canada nor is there a prevention of free speech. This was necessary and as a Canadian, I absolutely agree with the measure and it is temporary. These people were not protesting they held siege our capital city and the citizens in it. This is a white supremist mission to unseat our government, it is most definitely a National security issue.

PortTack

(32,118 posts)
18. The protesters are attacking the police and trying to confiscate their weapons
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 09:05 PM
Feb 2022

It may have been a peaceful protest, it isn’t anymore

Samrob

(4,298 posts)
4. People at all levels have lost their damn minds over COVD protocols.
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 07:49 PM
Feb 2022

Do these protestors even realize that they are probably able to protest because most of us have followed vaccination and masking mandates?

Sympthsical

(8,604 posts)
7. Doesn't matter
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 08:08 PM
Feb 2022

They're not the brightest people on earth, near as I can tell.

But a government assuming emergency powers to go after what was not a particularly large protest should be concerning to anyone.

The fact that it's cheered is deeply disturbing.

Response to Bev54 (Reply #11)

Bev54

(9,794 posts)
35. It is the occupation and anti Trudeau rhetoric that they hoped would make the Liberal
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 10:53 PM
Feb 2022

Party make him step down as leader. It was never going to work but just the same they tried and the conservatives were helping them. We have a minority government so they were hoping for a nonconfidence vote and a new election called. Our politics are much different than the US

Response to Bev54 (Reply #35)

Bernardo de La Paz

(48,375 posts)
44. Wrong. Rhetoric is no problem. Threats, provocations, weapons violations, etc are different
Sat Feb 19, 2022, 10:20 AM
Feb 2022

... from rhetoric and mere speech.

Similar distinctions are made in the US too.

Bernardo de La Paz

(48,375 posts)
43. Plus there were machinations about getting functionaries and/or GG to dissolve parliament
Sat Feb 19, 2022, 10:17 AM
Feb 2022

or otherwise force new elections.


Not to forget the arson with intent to murder at the apartment building in Ottawa.

Or the gun truck stolen and mostly (all?) recovered in southwestern Ontario.

Or the conspiracy to murder RCMP and heavy armaments discovered at the border out west.

Disaffected

(4,438 posts)
14. I'm not even clear on why
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 08:34 PM
Feb 2022

they needed court injunctions to act against the blocked roads and bridges and, the gross civil disturbance caused by the "protestors".

These protestor ass-hats were breaking the law once they started with the blockades, horn blowing, harassment etc. - they should have been removed and/or arrested or fined right off the bat.

Bev54

(9,794 posts)
23. They use the court injunction to give more severe penalties. It is one thing
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 09:23 PM
Feb 2022

to ignore police requests but something more to ignore the courts.

They have been issuing fines everyday, they will owe quite a bit. There were some arrests for other reasons as well. They needed the emergency act to compel the tow truck drivers who were concerned with backlash and with liability and insurance. They needed the emergency act to compel the banks to freeze funds, again absolves them of liability.

Disaffected

(4,438 posts)
25. OK but,
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 09:31 PM
Feb 2022

was it actually necessary to give more severe penalties? If a police request is ignored, the perps can still be arrested and removed from the scene (and their vehicles) which is, or was, the original objective.

I see what you mean though re the Emergencies Act - the situation had escalated to the point such that it became necessary

Bev54

(9,794 posts)
26. More severe penalties is what makes people leave, knowing there is more teeth
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 09:38 PM
Feb 2022

in the consequences. It was only used at border crossing, not in Ottawa.

Disaffected

(4,438 posts)
28. But they didn't need more severe penalties
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 09:50 PM
Feb 2022

to make them leave. They had all the authority they needed to remove them without the court injunction(s).

I suppose a court injunction may have induced some of them to leave voluntarily but that didn't work so the injunctions were pretty much moot. I guess maybe they though it was worth a try to get voluntary removal but, I dunno, I still think they should have hauled them off to begin with.

Bev54

(9,794 posts)
29. I am not really sure you are getting what I am saying. It did work, they left the
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 09:58 PM
Feb 2022

border crossing, where it was used. It is not being used in Ottawa.

Disaffected

(4,438 posts)
31. OK, I see what you mean.
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 10:05 PM
Feb 2022

I still contend though they should not have waited so long - they should have removed them before the injunction was applied for.

Sympthsical

(8,604 posts)
41. See, you get the argument
Sat Feb 19, 2022, 08:54 AM
Feb 2022

Your argument is basically my own. What tools were not in their kit that they needed to invoke emergency powers for? I have not seen a good argument outside of, "They deserve it!"

Anyway, I posted the story more for my own edification. A kind of, "Are we going so far down the rabbit hole that an ACLU-like organization's basic principles are now cast aside and untenable in the endless effort to 'get' anyone who we don't like?"

I mean, I knew the answer. But sometimes it's nice to see concretely.

Spazito

(49,500 posts)
16. It's really simply pro-forma...
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 08:49 PM
Feb 2022

The Emergencies Act has not been tested since it's passage in 1988 so it's not surprising the CCLA is going to challenge it.

Bev54

(9,794 posts)
24. That is a big problem and one people seem to ignore. I think our government knows
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 09:25 PM
Feb 2022

who is behind this occupation and it is not a grass roots movement, like people want to believe. They are dupes.

Sympthsical

(8,604 posts)
47. Is it ok on our side?
Sat Feb 19, 2022, 11:38 AM
Feb 2022

Because it's been ok on our side.

I knew what answers I'd get when I posted this. I just want other people to see the answers. Sometimes, just occasionally, you get one or two, "Oh shit, is that what we look like now?" Just as a steady diet of twinkies may lead to a photographic surprise a year later if you haven't seen yourself in awhile. A steady diet of hatred, suppression of disagreement, and slow erosion of civil liberties due to tribalism will do that.

A few years have passed. We lived on a steady diet of Trump. So, here's a mirror. This is what support of authoritarian behavior looks like.

Just putting it out there. But hey, sometimes people like being Liz Lemon's boyfriend, Drew.


FelineOverlord

(3,516 posts)
27. Sorry but no.
Fri Feb 18, 2022, 09:42 PM
Feb 2022

I don’t always agree with the ACLU either.

Chaos still abounds, and RW propaganda is still flooding social media from RW fanatics.

#HoldTheLine is trending on Canadian Twitter.

However, some of the organizers are in trouble.


Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Canadian Civil Liberties ...