From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

The Alberta premier fact-checked pro-LGBT Minister of Women and Gender Equality Marci Ien’s condemnation of pro-family legislation, pointing out that children who undergo irreversible gender surgeries and drugs suffer from the repercussions for life.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith blasted a Liberal minister for spreading the false claim that legislation will hurt gender-confused kids.

In an Oct. 1 exchange on X, formerly known as Twitter, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith fact-checked  pro-LGBT Minister of Women and Gender Equality Marci Ien’s condemnation of pro-family legislation, pointing out that children who undergo irreversible gender surgeries and drugs suffer from the repercussions for life.

“Premier Smith is doubling down on her plans to target trans youth,” Ien had written. “She says this conversation is only for ‘adults.’ That’s because she knows that if she listened to the people affected by these policies, she would have to face how many kids she is hurting.”

“Do you mean like listening to children going through this, @MarciIen?” Smith questioned, linking to a National Post article highlighting the pain and regret by detransitioners who made irreversible decision to take drugs and surgeries to change their bodies as young teens.

Do you mean like listening to children going through this, @MarciIen? 👇 https://t.co/S6jPYuoRGN pic.twitter.com/zldO6immhj

— Danielle Smith (@ABDanielleSmith) October 2, 2024

Later, Smith doubled down on her stance, saying, “In Alberta, we believe children should wait until adulthood before making physical changes to their body.”

“Furthermore, we believe in the rights of loving parents to be meaningfully engaged with their children’s education when sensitive issues are taught,” she continued. “And women and girls deserve the opportunity to compete fairly and safely in female-only divisions.”

Smith’s new legislation, which will take effect later this month, far surpasses other provinces in its protection of children and would make Alberta’s parental rights laws the strongest in the country.

Licensed doctors are prohibited from performing sex-change surgeries on youth under age 18 in Alberta. Puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones will be prohibited for minors under the age of 16 unless the minors have already begun taking those drugs.

Those “born biologically male” will be prohibited from competing against women and girls in competitive sports. Parental opt-in will be required for “each instance” a teacher wishes to discuss gender identity, sexual orientation, or human sexuality.

Parental notification is required for “socially transitioning” a student — that is, changing a student’s given name or pronouns. Unfortunately, 16- and 17-year-olds are still allowed to decide to change their name or pronouns in school, but parents must be notified.

While Smith has received severe backlash from LGBT activists, she revealed in February that the new legislation was a result of hearing of the horrors that took place at the U.K.’s Tavistock Centre, the National Health Service’s “gender clinic” for children who believe they are “transgender.”

In 2019, the clinic was exposed for approving “life-changing medical intervention” for children and teens “without sufficient evidence of its long-term effects.” Shortly after, the clinic was forced to shut down.

Smith was especially touched by the story of Keira Bell, who was given puberty blockers and testosterone injections by the Tavistock clinic and underwent a double mastectomy at age 20. She now “very seriously regrets the process” and has joined a lawsuit against the clinic.

Unfortunately, Bell’s story is not unique, as overwhelming evidence reveals that those who undergo so-called “gender transitioning” are more likely to commit suicide than those who are not given irreversible surgery. A Swedish study found that those who underwent so-called “gender reassignment” surgery ended up with a 19.2 times greater risk of suicide.

In fact, in addition to asserting a false reality that one’s sex can be changed, transgender surgeries and drugs have been linked to permanent physical and psychological damage, including cardiovascular diseases, loss of bone density, cancer, strokes and blood clots, infertility, and suicidality.

Indeed, there is proof that the most loving and helpful approach to people who think they are a different sex is not to validate them in their confusion but to show them the truth.

A new study on the side effects of transgender “sex change” surgeries discovered that 81 percent of those who had undergone “sex change” surgeries in the past five years reported experiencing pain simply from normal movement in the weeks and months that followed — and that many other side effects manifest as well.

Sheldon Yakiwchuk From Yakk Stack

To preface, the amount of knowledge I have in our legal system would fit into a thimble with a lot of room leftover to hold, well…a lot of other stuff that would fit into a thimble.

But I’m going to do my best to cover the certification hearing for the Class Action Lawsuit against the Province of Alberta by Rath and Company, on behalf of Rebecca Ingram and Chris Scott.

For the purposes of keeping this to a reasonable length, I’ll be hitting more along the lines of the high-notes instead of going through and summarizing the thousands of pages submitted by Rath and Co + the Province and keep to what I found most interesting throughout the 2 days I’d spent down at the courthouse viewing. The hearing was to allow both sides to submit their briefs and so that Justice Feasby could make sure that he understood the base of their cases, qualify information and take it away for judgement.

Even if Rath is successful in having this Class Action Certified, there is still a long road ahead to succeed in getting damages covered and a trial to be had and because of the specifics of the mishandling by the Province throughout the pandemic, if they are successful here, it doesn’t mean that every other province can proceed ahead, under the same criteria.

What does this mean?

The previous case against the Province with Rebecca Ingram, showed that the non-pharmaceutical interventions – lockdowns, businesses closed, capacity limits…were ruled Ultra Vires (beyond legal power or authority), by Justice Romaine…in that, these weren’t actually made by the Chief Medical Officer of Health (CMOH), Deena Hinshaw, they were made by Cabinet…and Cabinet hid behind Hinshaw issuing these orders under the Public Health Act instead of working with the Emergency Management Act.

Because of “Cabinet Privilege”, information was revealed by the CMOH and Justice Romaine – in camera (private) – we can only speculate the reasons for this.

One could argue that because the province and Alberta Health Services got 100% of everything wrong during the pandemic, that this was just another link in the very weak chain…

However, it’s also possible that the Cabinet Members making these decisions wanted to hide and remain hidden for political purposes, as in…those making the decisions to close down businesses didn’t want to have to face voters in a subsequent election, knowing the damages that they’d caused in the business community.

Seeing how many small businesses were closed down, to never reopen…savings spent, jobs and homes lost, lives impacted by these decisions, arguably touching every single person in the province, would make for some bad press and a constituencies filled with voters showing up with a chip on their shoulder towards those who made these decisions and still chose to run for Legislature again.

In addition to this…If the orders were run through the Emergency Management Act, all of the businesses impacted would be entitled to compensation, whereas under the Public Healthcare Act…they weren’t.

It’s based on these specificities that Rath argued that the Province acted in ‘Bad Faith’ as the basis for their case, in that, the province made decisions that they didn’t have the authority to make and absolutely had to have known would harm businesses and made them through the PHA which restricted these businesses from being compensated.

Rath had completed his presentation of their brief before lunch on the first day, where Feasby had a couple of points that he wanted clarified…which was completed after lunch on this same day.

And then…the Province took the podium.

As I’d previously stated, this was a bloodbath for the afternoon of Day 1 and continued on throughout their presentation on Day 2, where by Feasby openly mocked each member of the Province – Dube, Chu and Flanders.

Rightfully so, if I might add, because a lot of their logic was illogical and even to those of us in the gallery, laughable both with and without comments from the Justice.

On day 2, because of the chorus of opened mouthed guffaw from the gallery, we’d all received a warning try and keep it down.

Arguments made by the province which were stunning and laughable:

• The public does have a right to accountability and that these would be ‘Ballot Box Issues’, of course recognizing that Cabinet was the ones who made these decisions but because they were hidden behind Cabinet Confidence, we can’t actually have accountability, which of course Dube knew;
• The Plaintiffs (Rath on behalf of Ingram and Scott) needed to name the members responsible – which were, again, hidden by cabinet confidence;
• There is no fiduciary accountability afforded under the Public Health Act, where the interventions were deemed Ultra Vires;
• The Province couldn’t have known that businesses would be harmed by the orders – where Feasby stated that it would be impossible for them to Not Know;
• Businesses are not members of a vulnerable group – though were identified by the CMOH orders;
• There is no Nexus or Proximity between the Acts (CMOH orders) and Injury – where Feasby stated causation where orders made, closed businesses, that caused injury was the connection;
• A breach of the Bill of Rights does not necessitate compensation, where the use of the Public Health Act was engaged illegally by cabinet;
• No common issues exist – where all businesses that were impacted were impacted financially;
• Not all businesses that were impacted abided by the CMOH orders, though they may be able to still show financial losses during these times;
• Abuse of Power, by Cabinet in their orders, wasn’t actually an Abuse of Power because it was done in good faith;
• Even without the orders, during the pandemic, people still wanted to just stay home and avoid going out – they actually said this;
• Although the Pandemic Orders were deemed Ultra Vires, they were valid at the time. This was particularly stupid as an argument made repeatedly by Chu and lost the province some large points with Feasby. Her logic is that the orders WERE Valid up until the time they were deemed Ultra Vires…where Feasby stated, a definitive ‘Nope’. Once they were deemed Ultra Vires, this extended back to when they were put in place.
• The Plaintiffs should be suing Alberta Health Services, arguing that AHS is not the province, again another stupid point where the judge stated, “You can’t stand here with a straight face and make this as an argument”.
• Expropriation of businesses wasn’t actually expropriation (businesses shut down or limited in capacity were essentially expropriated – partially or fully taken away from leaseholders and property owners), because there were no transfer of titles and they weren’t kept by the province on a forever hold. When I’d asked Eva Chipiuk about this, she stated that the province had effectively made this up as terms of expropriation, this isn’t what it actually means…and this was clarified to the Justice by Jeff on reply following the Province stating their case on Day 2.
• Classes of businesses could not be identified for a Class Action Lawsuit – where, orders put out by the CMOH on behalf of Cabinet, specifically identified the types of businesses that would need to close or limit capacity. Jeff made a point on this where in the early stages, Casinos and Stripper Bars were allowed to be left open while Schools were closed. I did get a good laugh out of this recollection of events;
• It would be more beneficial for businesses who were harmed to represent themselves individually instead of through a Class Action – where smaller businesses would pay in excess of their claim in legal fees and clog the courts for decades;
• Businesses that lost money throughout this time would have immediately made it back once they were reopened – of which there is absolutely no way they could make this determination especially given the fact that hundreds of businesses closed forever during this time;
• Chris Scott and the Whistle Stop Cafe isn’t a suitable representation in the class action because Scott didn’t abide by CMOH orders, crowd funded over $100k, needed to hire more staff because of the surge of business that he’d received because of publicity around his location, paid off a loan for property, all in 2021…where, Chris did actually abide by CMOH orders in 2020, did lose money, was on the verge of bankruptcy and only worked to mitigate damages following several months of losses due to the CMOH orders;
• Chris Scott may have actually made more because of the pandemic, despite the fact that he was arrested, closed down, abided by CMOH orders in 2020, was getting death threats because of being branded negatively through media spun by his lack of compliance for the orders to keep him from losing everything;

There may be more…this is what I could get out of the 36 pages of notes that I’d taken over the course of the 2 days…but basically the Province brought in the C-Team of Lawyers making in attempts to make the case that:

AHS is not the province, acted illegally but in good faith, is not responsible for any damages because they didn’t fully expropriate businesses forever, couldn’t have known that businesses wouldn’t suffer from financial losses in being closed or restricted for months on end and even if they did, probably made their money back if not more money when they finally opened and couldn’t be lumped together because REASONS.

Whereas against the province, Rath and Company makes the claim that:

Cabinet made decisions that turned into illegal orders under the Public Healthcare Act, not using the Emergency Management Act so that they could hide the identity of the decision makers and skate on being financially liable for losses they knew would be incurred by businesses that were shut – acting in bad faith.

And again…while I don’t know a whole lot about the legal system, all of the laws and terms used throughout these 2 days, can appreciate that all requirements for a Class Action were met and responded to. The legality and relevance of these will be weighed by Justice Feasby and he’d seemed confident that he’ll be able to have a ruling on the Certification for Class Action by December 1st, 2024…and closed out with a statement that he wasn’t going to be accepting any additional documentation from either party. They’d effectively had their ‘day in court’, and had opportunity to clarify their cases.

Hope ya made it through all of this…and I hope it makes as much sense to you as does to me as in a solid – kinda. If you were watching the livestream or in the gallery and noted anything additional worthy of mention or correct me in any errors, please do so in the comments.

I’m looking forward to the next leg in this journey!

Leave a comment