Canada and the U.S. play dangerous games with rule of law
It is a sign of democracy’s decline when two of the world’s advocates of democracy play games with the rule of law.
Incoherent Joe Biden was quick to label innocent teenager Kyle Rittenhouse a racist long before one shred of evidence was known. And now reluctantly submits to the jury verdict while his surrogates in the media and his own party condemn the jury decision.
Additionally, Biden is trying to run roughshod over the Constitution by going through the back door to do something that he cannot do through the front door. Using the Occupational Heath and Safety agency to force private employers to enact vaccination rules has now been condemned by the Fifth Circuit Court as seriously flawed. Read the opening of the Court’s opinion:
“We first consider whether the petitioners’ challenges to the mandate are likely to succeed on the merits. For a multitude of reasons, they are.”
“It was not, and likely could not be, under the Commerce Clause and nondelegation doctrine —intended to authorize a workplace safety administration in the deep recesses of the federal bureaucracy to make sweeping pronouncements on matters of public health affecting every member of society in the profoundest of ways. Cf. Ala. Ass’n of Realtors v. HHS, 141 S. Ct. 2485, 2488–90 (2021) (per curiam).”
In Canada, Justin Trudeau, the socialist Canadians think is still somehow a democrat and capitalist, runs amok over the Constitution with reckless abandon sheepishly followed by the premiers, who foolishly ignore any semblance of principal for a few pieces of Federal silver, the rule of law and the Constitution left in their wake.
The various federal and provincial rules, regulations, and laws brazenly flout the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, an integral part of the Constitution Act of 1982. Not one shred of evidence, report, study, or cost benefit analysis has been done to meet the test of the Charter which demands in Section 1 that any override of the Charter provisions must “demonstrably justify” such action. And to do that by law, with reasonable limits, consistent with the values of a free and democratic society.
In the R v Oates decision of 1986 the Supreme Court of Canada
“Two central criteria must be satisfied to establish that a limit is reasonable and demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
“First, the objective to be served by the measures limiting a Charter right must be sufficiently important to warrant overriding a constitutionally protected right or freedom. The standard must be high to ensure that trivial objectives or those discordant with the principles of a free and democratic society do not gain protection. At a minimum, an objective must relate to societal concerns which are pressing and substantial in a free and democratic society before it can be characterized as sufficiently important.
Second, the party invoking s. 1 must show the means to be reasonable and demonstrably justified. This involves a form of proportionality test involving three important components.
To begin, the measures must be fair and not arbitrary, carefully designed to achieve the objective in question and rationally connected to that objective. In addition, the means should impair the right in question as little as possible.
Lastly, there must be a proportionality between the effects of the limiting measure and the objective – the more severe the deleterious effects of a measure, the more important the objective must be.”
Does anyone believe that Governments’ of Canada COVID measures come anywhere close to meeting this court’s conditions?
With our health and education systems in disarray, an obedient press, and a Pharma and Tech duopoly dictating public policy ours is a society that has lost its democratic way – the rule of law just another causality on this treacherous road.