Five Free Speech Wins in Canada This Year

 

Five significant victories in 2025 Dear friend of freedom, Sometimes, it is easy to get discouraged by court decisions that do not go our way.   Despite these challenges, we are excited to share five significant victories that donors to the Justice Centre have made possible in the first few months of 2025.   Each victory sets a precedent that makes it harder for governments to violate your rights and freedoms in the future. Victory: Ottawa court acquits trucker Harold Jonker of all charges, upholding the freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly  (Photo courtesy of Harold Jonker) Harold Jonker, a trucking company owner from West Lincoln in Ontario’s Niagara region, joined the peaceful Freedom Convoy protest as a “road captain” for the Niagara contingent and arrived in Ottawa on January 28, 2022. He was in the nation’s capital for three weeks, peacefully protesting the Covid vaccine mandates that had stripped millions of Canadians of their rights and freedoms.  Fifteen months after his participation in the peaceful Freedom Convoy, police criminally charged Harold with mischief, counselling mischief, intimidation, and counselling intimidation. His trial, originally scheduled for ten full days, took place from May 12 to 14 before Justice Kevin B. Phillips of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. After a mere three days, Justice Phillips acquitted Harold of all charges, pointing to the Crown’s weak arguments. Justice Phillips found that Harold had not counselled mischief. On the contrary, he merely described the events as he witnessed them. Justice Phillips also found that Harold had legally parked his rig and was not responsible for how other truckers had parked theirs. After hearing the news, Harold shared his gratitude with Justice Centre donors, saying, “We are very thankful for the excellent legal service provided by the Justice Centre, and thankful that the judge saw through the Crown’s weak case and had the courage to do the right thing.” His lawyer, Chris Fleury, noted, “Harold and I are elated with the outcome of his case. We agree with the trial judge that the Crown had not proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt.” Donate to cases like this Victory: Ontario Ministry of Transportation reconsiders censorship, admits sign does not promote hatred George Katerberg’s original roadside billboard (Photo courtesy of George Katerberg) After being ordered to remove a billboard criticizing Covid vaccine mandates, a retired Ontario tradesman has successfully defended his right to freedom of expression. In March 2024, George Katerberg rented a billboard along Highway 17 near Thessalon, Ontario. Featuring images of Canadian politicians and health officials, the sign read, “They knowingly lied about safety and stopping transmission. Canadians demand accountability.” Ontario’s Ministry of Transportation ordered the sign to be removed, claiming that it could promote hatred or contempt toward government officials. With help from the Justice Centre, George filed a court application, asking the Superior Court of Justice to overturn the Ministry’s decision. He argued that the Ministry had unjustifiably violated his freedom of expression and that he had not violated any law. Just days before the April 28 federal election, the Ministry reconsidered its decision and allowed the sign to be displayed again. Constitutional lawyer Chris Fleury remarked, “Mr. Katerberg’s proposed sign was a matter of legitimate expression protected by the Charter. In a functioning democracy, individuals like Mr. Katerberg need to be able to express their dissatisfaction with public officials.” “I’m self-employed and worked hard all my life,” said George, in a note to Justice Centre donors. “I wouldn’t have been able to take on this case myself. I’m glad the Justice Centre was able to support me.” Donate to cases like this Victory: Court rules that Ontario’s total ban on outdoor gatherings violated the freedom of peaceful assembly  Former Member of Provincial Parliament Randy Hillier (Photo credit: Mike Crawley) On April 7, Ontario’s top court ruled that the province’s total ban on outdoor gatherings in 2021 violated citizens’ freedom of peaceful assembly - protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is significant that a court has ruled against the government and declared that Covid lockdowns violated the Constitution. In 2021, police ticketed former MPP Randy Hillier for attending outdoor protests in Kemptville and Cornwall, Ontario, where he spoke about the damaging impacts of lockdowns and the importance of Charter rights. At the time, Ontario had banned any outdoor gatherings, even between two people. Mr. Hillier argued that the restrictions violated his freedom of peaceful assembly. His case included expert evidence from Dr. Kevin Bardosh, detailing lockdown harms such as depression, suicidal ideation, addiction, job loss, and small business closures.  A lower court dismissed the challenge in 2023, completely disregarding Dr. Bardosh’s expertise and failing to consider evidence about lockdown harms.  But, in his April 7 decision, Justice Peter Lauwers of the Ontario Court of Appeal decided that Ontario’s total ban on peaceful assembly was an unjustified violation of the Charter. Justice Lauwers wrote that to decide otherwise would be “entirely contrary to the purpose of the Charter in protecting the free exercise of fundamental freedoms against the limiting actions of government.” “The Constitution does not fade from view in times of crisis,” he wrote. Donate to cases like this Victory: Nova Scotia Supreme Court rules that hurt feelings do not equal discrimination  Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Photo credit: Rosemarie Mosteller) The Supreme Court of Nova Scotia has dismissed a human rights complaint filed against Saint Mary’s University and the Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship, ruling that there is no right not to be offended in Canada. The case arose from a 2019 article by Saint Mary’s University Professor John MacKinnon, who raised concerns about academic integrity and the influence of “indigenization” in post-secondary institutions. A student, mentioned only as “Q” in the article, believed she was the subject of the article. More than a year later, she filed a discrimination complaint. But on April 17, 2025, Justice Denise Boudreau ruled that the complaint should never have gone forward. In her decision, she wrote, “Being upset or offended is not the same as discrimination,” and “Let us remember that freedom of expression is a Charter-protected right in Canada.” Constitutional lawyer Chris Fleury welcomed the ruling, saying, “The Court rightly agreed with our submission that freedom of expression is not to be interfered with, even in the context of a human rights complaint.” Donate to cases like this Victory: Prosecutors admit that Toronto police breached freedom of expression at Santa Claus parade  The 1934 Santa Claus parade in Toronto (City of Toronto Archives) Street preacher Jeffrey Sapocinik faced a criminal charge after criticizing “the adoration of Santa Claus” during Toronto’s 119th annual Santa Claus Parade on November 26, 2023. Troubled by what he saw as the secularization of the Christmas season, Jeffrey shared his concerns with others waiting for the parade to roll by. Some bystanders were offended, and police arrested him. Remarkably, he was charged under section 176(2) of the Criminal Code - a law meant to protect private social gatherings from disruptions. With help from lawyers provided by the Justice Centre, Jeffrey pleaded “not guilty,” arguing that outdoor parades on public streets are not the type of gathering the law was meant to protect.  In negotiations with Crown prosecutors, Justice Centre lawyers cited past court rulings affirming that public streets are places where a wide range of expression must be tolerated—even if some find it upsetting. One day before Jeffrey’s trial, the Crown informed his legal team that the charge would be dropped.  “This was an important win for freedom of expression,” stated constitutional lawyer Chris Fleury. “Charging Mr. Sapocinik under section 176(2) of the Criminal Code was perverse and unprecedented. We were not able to find a single reported case where a religious leader or practitioner had been prosecuted under this section for allegedly disturbing a purely social gathering. We are pleased to see the Crown withdraw all charges.” When Jeffrey heard the news, he said, “I would like to personally express my utmost gratitude to the Justice Centre for choosing to fund my legal defence…their help alleviated what may have been a financial burden.” Make a donation to the Justice Centre today We are not even halfway through the year, and we have already secured significant, precedent-setting victories for freedom of expression, freedom of peaceful assembly, and accountable government.   Our legal team, our communications team, and myself personally, we are all deeply grateful to the donors who have made these successes possible.  If you have not previously donated to the Justice Centre, please consider doing so today. You can join other freedom-loving Canadians in making it possible for us to defend your freedoms in the courts of law and the court of public opinion.  If you are already a donor, thank you, and please renew your support today, to make it possible for our team to secure further victories. Also, please consider becoming a monthly donor so that the Justice Centre can continue to defend your rights and freedoms throughout 2025.   Other ways to give We accept donations by secure e-transfer to etransfer@jccf.ca. Please include your full name, mailing address, postal code, and email address in the notes of your e-transfer or in a follow-up email. We need this information to issue official tax receipts.   We accept credit card donations here and also over the phone at 403-475-3622.  We accept donations by cheque. Please mail your cheque to 253-7620 Elbow Drive SW, Calgary, AB, T2V 1K2.  For those interested in exploring legacy gifts, please email us at info@jccf.ca.  Yours sincerely, John Carpay, B.A., LL.B. President and Founder Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

Oklahoma MassResistance Pushing Obergefell Resolution!

 

In the Oklahoma Legislature: MassResistance’s Obergefell resolution has the votes to pass, but RINO Senate leader is blocking it.

Senator blocking it was primaried last year by her local GOP.

MassResistance activists in her district are lobbying hard to let resolution proceed.

Urgency as session concludes at the end of May. A big battle!

 May 24, 2025

 More than half of the Oklahoma Senate are co-sponsors of the resolution! But one terrible RINO in leadership is blocking it.

The MassResistance push to ultimately reverse same-sex “marriage” is successfully moving across the country. Shockingly, our resolutions in state legislatures get blocked not by leftists, but by RINO Republicans. (That happened in Montana, where the Republican legislator who buried the effort admitted she has a “married” lesbian daughter.) Oklahoma is the latest battleground.

Background

As we’ve described, the 2015 US Supreme Court 5-4 Obergefell ruling that imposed “gay marriage” across America was deeply flawed constitutionally, and two of the Justices who ruled in favor should legally have recused themselves. Justices Thomas and Alito have stated that the Obergefell ruling should be reviewed (as happened with Roe v. Wade).

MassResistance has drafted a bold resolution for state legislatures across the country to pass, urging the Supreme Court to revisit the case. It has passed the House of Representatives in two states and several other legislatures are in the process of acting on it.

Introduced and poised to pass in the OK Senate – but blocked by a RINO

Oklahoma is a true “red state.” Last month, in commemoration of Easter, the state House of Representatives passed a resolution proclaiming that “Christ is King.” So, the normal definition of marriage is hardly controversial there.

On May 1, 2025, State Senator Dusty Deevers (who is also a Southern Baptist pastor) introduced the MassResistance resolution as Senate Resolution 8.

 The main sponsor, Sen. Dusty Deevers, is the real thing! We wish there were legislators like him everywhere!

The 48-member Oklahoma Senate needs 25 votes to pass legislation. Sen. Deevers’ resolution has generated great enthusiasm, and has 25 senators as co-sponsors, so it would certainly pass. It should be on the road to victory.

But it is being blocked by the Republican Senate Majority Leader, Sen. Julie Daniels (R-Bartlesville). The legislative session concludes at the end of this month, so the fight is quickly heating up.

Sen. Daniels’ constituents angry she is blocking the resolution

This is not playing well back home. This resolution is very popular in Sen. Daniels’ district. Last month, her own county Republican Committee overwhelmingly voted to endorse it.

Sen. Julie Daniels is now more unpopular than ever in her district.

Sen. Daniels lives in Bartlesville, which has a very active MassResistance chapter. They have flooded her office with calls, but (as of this writing) she refuses to say why she is blocking the resolution. And that makes her constituents even angrier!

 Bartlesville MassResistance activists protest outside of a Drag Queen event for children in the town. (Yes, it's even come to Oklahoma!)

Her conservative constituents want this resolution fairly voted on in their legislature, and are outraged that she’s the one standing in the way!

This isn’t the first time Sen. Daniels has run into trouble back home. Her RINO stances have apparently been bothering folks for some time. In June 2024, she had to beat back three challengers in the primary. (Unfortunately, the conservative vote got split because two additional challengers had jumped in.) Fortunately, she is term-limited out and can’t run again.

Media going nuts

Even in Oklahoma, the media leans far left. Not surprisingly, across the country they’re all reporting this commonsense resolution as a threat to democracy and human rights.

National media

Newsweek: Republicans Launch Bid to Overturn Obergefell

Newsmax: Oklahoma State Senate Pushes to Overturn Gay Marriage

NewsNationNow: Oklahoma lawmaker asks Supreme Court to overturn gay marriage ruling

Oklahoma media

KFOR News: OK Resolution asks SCOTUS to overturn gay marriage ruling

The national LGBT press is especially steamed:

LGBTQ Nation: Oklahoma GOP legislators ask Supreme Court to overturn same-sex marriage

But there is some fun conservative reporting on this:

The Dissenter: Oklahoma Senator and Baptist Pastor Introduces Resolution to Overturn Obergefell “Senate Resolution 8 is essentially a manifesto of resistance, a line drawn in the cultural sand. It’s Oklahoma’s way of saying, ’Enough.’”

Final thoughts

This resolution has attracted a lot more energy and enthusiasm across the country than we anticipated, especially among state legislators. In a growing list of states, they’re ready to file it next session. It’s exciting. People have had enough! The LGBT propaganda about this being “settled law” is simply untrue.

But we also hadn’t anticipated that the RINOs in “red” states would be among the biggest impediments. This is a big problem over many important issues. Conservative voters need to be informed about their candidates!

The “gay marriage” fantasy will eventually be revealed as a fraud. This fight is not stopping!

   

Please help us continue to do our uncompromising work!

Our successes depend on people like you.

Donate to MassResistance

Your support will make the difference!

The Japanese Military Bear the Blame for Children's Deaths During WW II

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by grace guentzel (@yourhistorygal)

Letter to the Editor: "Leo XIV IS NOT AN AMERICAN POPE"

In response to An American Pope (America Papam Habet!)

With all due respect, Leo XIV IS NOT AN AMERICAN POPE.

He is an AMERICAN BORN person that was elected Pope. He was not born in Chicago, but a south side suburb.

He was ordained in the Vatican. He was never a parish priest or pastor in a parish in America. He became a bishop in Peru and a Cardinal in the Vatican. He spent more of his life outside the USA than in it.

In reality, he’s a Vatican Bureaucrat.

So, please stop the parade and the party for Leo XIV. Report the facts.

David Goode

Huntley, IL (Chicago suburb)

Response:

David:

Thank you for your letter.

I haven't had a chance to respond until now.

Pope Leo XIV was born in the United States and trained in the United States.

He's an American pope in that regard, and I am glad to celebrate that fact.

Thanks for writing, though!

The Last Emperor: Another Take on the Final Scene

I just watched The Last Emperor again, and I really liked it.

I rented the director's cut, which was too long. I liked the theatrical release. Much of the work in the extended version is distracting, unnecessary, and drags the pacing of the movie.

I wanted to comment on the final Pu Yi scene, when he finds his former governor during his time in the Chinese (Marxist) re-education camp:

           

Puyi questions one of the younger guards stationed next to the former governor. He says that there must be some mistake. He could not have done anything wrong.

When he asks, "What crime has he committed?

They only tell him that he has been accused. Of what? A slurry of accusations comes from there other Red students, accusing him of supporting the Emperor, Zionist forces, or the right-wing.

Incredible stuff.

This is a sad and bitter irony, if there ever was one.

The governor brow-beat and bullied Puyi into submission, turning him into a dutiful soldier for the Maoist regime. Now, the same teacher is getting worse treatment, likely from the very young people he helped indoctrinate!

Despite being walled up, cloistered, and imprisoned for most of his life, Puyi is finally free as an everyday citizen in China.

The governor who had stolen away his freedom, dignity, and identity is now targeted with raging accusations, and he is forced to kowtow, even bowing to the Last Emperor.

The irony is too deep to ignore. Puyi committed no crimes, and yet he was persecuted.

Now the governor gets a taste of his own medicine, and yet for all of this, Puyi still thinks of that disgraced governor as a good man. Tragic, indeed.