COVID-19
Free speech victory: Charges against nurse who opposed vaccine mandates defeated
News release from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedom
The Justice Centre is pleased to announce that the College of Registered Nurses of Saskatchewan (CRNS) has ruled in favour of nurse Leah McInnes following an October and November 2023 disciplinary hearing. The Investigation Committee of the CRNS had charged Ms. McInnes with spreading “misinformation” because she had voiced her concerns about vaccine mandates. The outcome vindicates her right to professionally advocate for medical ethics and evidence-based health policy.“This is a significant victory for free expression and democratic participation. Nurses, doctors, psychologists, teachers, lawyers, engineers and all Canadians who work in a regulated profession have the freedom to advocate for their beliefs and should not face threats from their own professional association or professional regulator,” stated John Carpay, President of the Justice Centre. Ms. McInnes had been charged by the CRNS’s Investigation Committee, which investigates and prosecutes professional misconduct complaints, for her social media advocacy and for protesting vaccine mandates. The Investigation Committee’s broad allegation against Ms. McInnes was that her advocacy, including her use of the common term “vaccine mandate,” amounted to “misinformation.” Ms. McInnes is a mother of two and has been a Registered Nurse in Saskatchewan since 2013. Ms. McInnes’s advocacy was measured and balanced. She had supported vaccines as an important tool in Covid-management efforts while also pointing to emerging scientific evidence regarding viral loads and transmission, which showed that Covid vaccines did not eliminate transmission. Ms. McInnes opposed vaccine mandates as a violation of basic ethical principles of autonomy and informed and voluntary consent of each and every patient. When Covid vaccines were introduced and voluntarily received in the spring and summer of 2021, the question of vaccine mandates was publicly debated across Canada. On June 30, 2021, the Saskatchewan Government indicated that it would not enforce a vaccine mandate because doing so would pose a “potential violation of health information privacy,” and, later, that it would “infringe on people’s personal rights.” The Saskatchewan Government also stated that a vaccine mandate for provincial employees was not being considered and, on September 10, 2021, rejected a proof-of-vaccination system, stating that mandates create “two classes of citizens based on… vaccination status,” and would be a “divisive path for a government to take.” Similar sentiments were echoed by Alberta’s Jason Kenney and Ontario’s Doug Ford, who claimed it would lead to a “split society.”Around the same time, the Saskatchewan Union of Nurses was calling for the “mandatory immunization” of all healthcare workers–a demand repeated by many, including Saskatchewan NDP leader Ryan Meili and a group of Saskatchewan Health Authority’s Medical Health Officers. Guided by her conscience and professional ethics, notably, her respect for bodily autonomy and informed consent, Ms. McInnes vocally opposed vaccine mandates. She protested vaccine mandates by holding a sign that read, “RN against Mandates and Vax Passports.” According to the Investigation Committee of the College, this sign amounted to “misinformation” with an intention to deceive. Shortly after Ms. McInnes’s advocacy began, the Saskatchewan Government changed course and imposed a vaccine mandate.
A fellow Registered Nurse filed a complaint, calling Ms. McInnes, “Leah aka anti-vaxxer.”The complaint resulted in charges, including the charge that Ms. McInnes knowingly spread misinformation on the basis that, purportedly, no “vaccination mandates” had ever been implemented. It appeared that, according to the Investigation Committee, only a policy of “restrain and vaccinate” qualified as a “vaccine mandate.”After an initial investigation, the Investigation Committee proposed an agreement that would have Ms. McInnes admit to professional misconduct, but she rejected this offer, choosing instead to stand up for her professional and Charter rights. The Investigation Committee charged her on March 28, 2023, and filed a Notice of Hearing, the details of which were later expanded after counsel for Ms. McInnes demanded clarity from the College as to what exactly the College alleged to be “misinformation”, “disinformation” or “misleading” information.Ms. McInnes’s expert witness, former Chief Medical Officer of Health of Ontario Dr. Richard Schabas, confirmed that the term “vaccine mandate” had, in the medical profession, no special meaning beyond its meaning in everyday language. In all contexts, “vaccine mandate” refers to a requirement to either get injected or lose certain rights or freedoms. “Ms. McInnes used the term ‘vaccine mandate’ just as nearly everyone else did in public discourse, including the Toronto Star, the CBC, CTV, the Saskatoon Star Phoenix, CKOM, the Saskatchewan Union of Nurses, academia, Occupational Health and Safety, Saskatchewan Health Authority, the Saskatchewan NDP, and governments,” stated Andre Memauri, co-counsel for Ms. McInnes. “But the Investigation Committee nevertheless forced Ms. McInnes through this painful process, causing her needless grief,” continued Memauri.The Investigation Committee also alleged that Ms. McInnes knowingly spread misinformation about Covid vaccines. Ms. McInnes had posted that vaccines did not provide sterilizing immunity, i.e., that vaccinated people could contract and transmit the virus. During the hearings that took place in 2023, experts, including the Investigation Committee’s own expert, testified that vaccines do not provide sterilizing immunity, vindicating Ms. McInnes. Co-counsel to Ms. McInnes, Glenn Blackett, says, “It’s chilling to recall that this vitally important fact, that the Covid vaccine did not provide sterilizing immunity, was broadly censored while Canadians were supposedly debating the wisdom of vaccine mandates. Poor information makes for poor decisions.”Thankfully for Ms. McInnes and all Canadians who depend on an informed and ethical nursing profession, the Discipline Committee of the College accepted the evidence presented to them and found that Ms. McInnes had, in no way, misinformed the public.Mr. Blackett continued, “This is a hugely important decision, not just for Ms. McInnes, who embodies the ‘moral courage’ Canadians should expect of all health professionals. It is perhaps most important for upholding a nurse’s right to voice ethical and scientific dissent and to participate in democratic discourse. The importance of professional freedom of speech and conscience can hardly be overstated. Science, ethics and democracy simply do not operate without freedom to think and speak. If you can’t trust a professional, be it a nurse, doctor or lawyer, to tell you what they think is true, you can’t trust them at all.”As for Ms. McInnes, she sees this as a victory for free speech in the medical community which will only lead to better outcomes. “I very much value the right of my colleagues to express opinions different than mine and support them in their endeavours to seek change in healthcare and government policy they perceive to be in the public interest. I’m grateful that the CRNS Discipline Committee recognized my right to do the same, as it’s only in the collection of our opinions that the public truly benefits,” she stated. After hearings and submissions in October and November 2023, the College’s Discipline Committee published their decision on January 12, 2024, dismissing all charges against Ms. McInnes. In their decision, the Discipline Committee stated that the case against Ms. McInnes should not have even proceeded to a hearing.
COVID-19
University of Colorado will pay $10 million to staff, students for trying to force them to take COVID shots
From LifeSiteNews
The University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine caused ‘life-altering damage’ to Catholics and other religious groups by denying them exemptions to its COVID shot mandate, and now the school must pay a hefty settlement.
The University of Colorado’s Anschutz School of Medicine must pay more than $10.3 million to 18 plaintiffs it attempted to force into taking COVID-19 shots despite religious objections, in a settlement announced by the religious liberty law firm the Thomas More Society.
As previously covered by LifeSiteNews, in April 2021, the University of Colorado (UC) announced its requirement that all staff and students receive COVID jabs, leaving specific policy details to individual campuses. On September 1, 2021, it enforced an updated policy stating that “religious exemption may be submitted based on a person’s religious belief whose teachings are opposed to all immunizations,” but required not only a written explanation why one’s “sincerely held religious belief, practice of observance prevents them” from taking the jabs, but also whether they “had an influenza or other vaccine in the past.”
On September 24, the policy was revised to stating that “religious accommodation may be granted based on an employee’s religious beliefs,” but “will not be granted if the accommodation would unduly burden the health and safety of other Individuals, patients, or the campus community.”
In practice, the school denied religious exemptions to Catholic, Buddhist, Eastern Orthodox, Evangelical, Protestant, and other applicants, most represented by Thomas More in a lawsuit contending that administrators “rejected any application for a religious exemption unless an applicant could convince the Administration that her religion ‘teaches (them) and all other adherents that immunizations are forbidden under all circumstances.’”
The UC system dropped the mandate in May 2023, but the harm had been done to those denied exemptions while it was in effect, including unpaid leave, eventual firing, being forced into remote work, and pay cuts.
In May 2024, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals rebuked the school for denying the accommodations. Writing for the majority, Judge Allison Eid found that a “government employer may not punish some employees, but not others, for the same activity, due only to differences in the employee’s religious beliefs.”
Now, Thomas More announces that year-long settlement negotiations have finally secured the aforementioned hefty settlement for their clients, covering damages, tuition costs, and attorney’s fees. It also ensured the UC will agree to allow and consider religious accommodation requests on an equal basis to medical exemption requests and abstain from probing the validity of applicants’ religious beliefs in the future.
“No amount of compensation or course-correction can make up for the life-altering damage Chancellor Elliman and Anschutz inflicted on the plaintiffs and so many others throughout this case, who felt forced to succumb to a manifestly irrational mandate,” declared senior Thomas More attorney Michael McHale. “At great, and sometimes career-ending, costs, our heroic clients fought for the First Amendment freedoms of all Americans who were put to the unconscionable choice of their livelihoods or their faith during what Justice Gorsuch has rightly declared one of ‘the greatest intrusion[s] on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country.’ We are confident our clients’ long-overdue victory indeed confirms, despite the tyrannical efforts of many, that our shared constitutional right to religious liberty endures.”
On top of the numerous serious adverse medical events that have been linked to the COVID shots and their demonstrated ineffectiveness at reducing symptoms or transmission of the virus, many religious and pro-life Americans also object to the shots on moral grounds, due to the ethics of how they were developed.
According to a detailed overview by the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute, Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson all used fetal cells derived from aborted babies during their COVID shots’ testing phase; and Johnson & Johnson also used the cells during the design and development and production phases. The American Association for the Advancement of Science’s journal Science and even the left-wing “fact-checking” outlet Snopes have also admitted the shots’ abortion connection, which gives many a moral aversion to associating with them.
Catholic World Report notes that similarly large sums have been won in other high-profile lawsuits against COVID shot mandates, including $10.3 million to more than 500 NorthShore University HealthSystem employees in 2022 and $12.7 million to a Catholic Michigander fired by Blue Cross Blue Shield in 2024.
From the YouTube channel of Dr John Campbell
There aren’t many people as good at explaining complex medical situations at Dr. John Campbell. That’s probably because this British Health Researcher spent his career teaching medicine to nurses.
Over the last number of years, Campbell has garnered an audience of millions of regular people who want to understand various aspects of the world of medical treatment.
In this important video Campbell explains how the new mRNA platform of vaccines can cause very serious health outcomes.
Dr. Campbell’s notes for this video:
Excess Deaths in the United Kingdom: Midazolam and Euthanasia in the COVID-19 Pandemic https://www.researchgate.net/publicat… Macro-data during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom (UK) are shown to have significant data anomalies and inconsistencies with existing explanations. This paper shows that the UK spike in deaths, wrongly attributed to COVID-19 in April 2020, was not due to SARS-CoV-2 virus, which was largely absent, but was due to the widespread use of Midazolam injections, which were statistically very highly correlated (coefficient over 90%) with excess deaths in all regions of England during 2020. Importantly, excess deaths remained elevated following mass vaccination in 2021, but were statistically uncorrelated to COVID injections, while remaining significantly correlated to Midazolam injections. The widespread and persistent use of Midazolam in UK suggests a possible policy of systemic euthanasia. Unlike Australia, where assessing the statistical impact of COVID injections on excess deaths is relatively straightforward, UK excess deaths were closely associated with the use of Midazolam and other medical intervention. The iatrogenic pandemic in the UK was caused by euthanasia deaths from Midazolam and also, likely caused by COVID injections, but their relative impacts are difficult to measure from the data, due to causal proximity of euthanasia. Global investigations of COVID-19 epidemiology, based only on the relative impacts of COVID disease and vaccination, may be inaccurate, due to the neglect of significant confounding factors in some countries. Graphs April 2020, 98.8% increase 43,796 January 2021, 29.2% increase 16,546 Therefore covid is very dangerous, This interpretation, which is disputable, justified politically the declaration of emergency and all public health measures, including masking, lockdowns, etc. Excess deaths and erroneous conclusions 2020, 76,000 2021, 54,000 2022, 45,000 This evidence of “vaccine effectiveness” was illusory, due to incorrect attribution of the 2020 death spike. PS Despite advances in modern information technology, the accuracy of data collection has not advanced in the United Kingdom for over 150 years, because the same problems of erroneous data entry found then are still found now in the COVID pandemic, not only in the UK but all over the world. We have independently discovered the same UK data problem and solution for assessing COVID-19 vaccination as Alfred Russel Wallace had 150 years ago in investigating the consequences of Vaccination Acts starting in 1840 on smallpox: The Alfred Russel Wallace as used by Wilson Sy “Having thus cleared away the mass of doubtful or erroneous statistics, depending on comparisons of the vaccinated and unvaccinated in limited areas or selected groups of patients, we turn to the only really important evidence, those ‘masses of national experience’…” https://archive.org/details/b21356336… Alfred Russel Wallace, 1880s–1890s 1840 Vaccination Act Provided free smallpox vaccination to the poor Banned variolation Vaccination compulsory in 1853, 1867 Why his interest? C 1885 The Leicester Anti-Vaccination demonstrations (1885) Growing public resistance to compulsory vaccination Wallace’s increasing involvement in social reform and statistical arguments Statistical critique of vaccination Government data on: Smallpox mortality trends before and after compulsory vaccination Case mortality rates Vaccination vs. sanitation effects Mortality trends before and after each Act, 1853 and 1867 “Forty-Five Years of Registration Statistics, Proving Vaccination to Be Both Useless and Dangerous” (1885) “Vaccination a Delusion; Its Penal Enforcement a Crime” (1898) Contributions to the Royal Commission on Vaccination (1890–1896) Wallace argued: Declining smallpox mortality was due to improved sanitation, not vaccination Official statistics were misinterpreted or biased Compulsory vaccination was unjust Re-vaccination did not reliably prevent outbreaks These views were strongly disputed, then and now. Wallace had a strong distrust of medical authority He and believed in: Statistical reasoning Social reform Opposition to coercive government measures The primacy of environmental and sanitary conditions in health
Canadians will soon be versed in massive West Coast LPG mega-project
Keynote address of Premier Danielle Smith at 2025 UCP AGM
Canada Needs an Alternative to Carney’s One Man Show
Net Zero goal is a fundamental flaw in the Ottawa-Alberta MOU
-
Alberta2 days agoThis new Canada–Alberta pipeline agreement will cost you more than you think
-
Energy2 days agoUnceded is uncertain
-
Energy1 day agoCanada following Europe’s stumble by ignoring energy reality
-
Automotive2 days agoPower Struggle: Governments start quietly backing away from EV mandates
-
Business1 day agoCanada’s climate agenda hit business hard but barely cut emissions
-
MAiD1 day agoFrom Exception to Routine. Why Canada’s State-Assisted Suicide Regime Demands a Human-Rights Review
-
International10 hours agoFBI may have finally nabbed the Jan. 6 pipe bomber
-
Business1 day agoCarney government should privatize airports—then open airline industry to competition