Lawsuits challenging the mask mandates?

[JackGunn]

Does anybody know of any existing lawsuits challenging mask mandates in Alberta, or anywhere in Canada?  I would think a simple claim of a charter violation in regards to personal liberty would be all it would take.  Though I consulted a law professor about it this morning and he’s quite certain that governments would have no problem convincing a court that an infringement on civil liberties is justified.

Still, I would hope that a court would at least require the government’s infringement on civil liberties to be justified based on scientifically established fact that shows a clear public benefit, and I just don’t see any how any government could present evidence to that point as all the evidence I’ve seen shows clearly that masks do not slow the spread of a virus.

Though I’m not legal expert by any means, I can think of at least three arguments that I would hope a court would consider as at least worthy of consideration in this matter.

1. Telling me what to wear infringes on my right to liberty as per the charter.  Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms states “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.”.  I consider the right to choose what I wear and don’t wear an essential aspect of liberty.  The charter states that this right can only be deprived in accordance with the principle of fundamental justice, which I don’t see being applied here.
2. Is it not true that any health mandates imposed on the public need to be justifiable?  If that is the case then I would argue that the province has failed to prove the following: 2.1: That the pandemic is threatening to overwhelm the health care system and 2.2: That the measures they’ve imposed on us would do anything to curb the spread of the virus
3. Accepting that Deena Hinshaw has the authority to impose restrictions in order to curb the spread of the virus, does her authority to impose health measures not imply that those measures are known to achieve the goal of reducing the spread of the virus?  For example, if she were to mandate that we all wear red pants on Friday, knowing that this will do nothing to slow the spread of the virus, could this not be successfully challenged in court?  If so, then I would argue that we’ve known forever that mask wearing does not reduce the spread of a virus, and is therefore no more effective than telling us to all wear red pants on Fridays, and therefore this mandate is outside the scope of her authority.

[Author]

Posts