Jeffrey Ansloos@jeffreyansloos May 15, 2024:
In an era marked by extraordinary uses of injunctions by corporations, universities & governments to undermine political protest and dissent, this is a win for all of us.
Judge denies injunction request to dismantle McGill encampment https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/judge-denies-mcgill-injunction-request-for-injunction-have-encampment-dismantled via @mtlgazette
The legality of the encampments is literally the subject of the debate. I have my perspective, as do various faceless profiles (looking at you @IntolerantGenX), but let’s be clear: the Judge’s ruling rejected the request as ‘ill-founded.’ omd! Turns out, suppressing protected political speech against genocide and removing protesters through private property claims about a public university isn’t the vibe, my dude.
Alex Neve@AlexNeve24 May 15, 2024:
Any university contemplating enforcement action against encampments should think twice and should at a minimum turn to the courts before taking any steps to dismantle (something @UCalgary @UAlberta clearly did not do). Two times now, two different Quebec Superior Court judges have ruled there are insufficient grounds, and no evidence of urgency, to curtail protest rights. Latest is below. This is rule of law in action.
Prem Thakker@prem_thakker May 15, 2024:
A judge has ruled against Brown University’s aims to charge 41 of its own students with trespassing for holding a December sit-in protest calling for divestment.
“I think this is a reflection of what nonviolent and peaceful resistance, frankly, is supposed to look like,” he said.
Nigel Bankes@NdbYyc1305:
And equally, any police service – looking at you @CalgaryPolice and @edmontonpolice that receives a request to clear an encampment from a university or a city should be saying – not until you get us a court injunction to enforce.
Bruce Ryder@BBRyder:
Justice Marc St-Pierre has rejected @mcgillu’s demand for an interim injunction to dismantle the pro-Palestinian encampment on campus. He was clearly not impressed with the university administration’s arguments.
… The judge noted there was no evidence of any serious incidents or violence (para 25) and that an interim injunction could not be issued based on speculative risks. (para 28)
He also noted that the university had made “ill-founded” demands, like an order prohibiting anyone from protesting on campus in violation of university policies or procedures. (para 33)
Justice St-Pierre, in other words, exercised restraint in the face of demands to interfere with freedom of expression and peaceful assembly on campus. Hopefully university administrations across the country are taking note. @UCalgary @UAlberta
irina ceric@irinaceric:
Fuck yeah! Court rejects McGill’s injunction request https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/mcgill-injunction-request-1.7203666
The court starts by rejecting McGill’s initial application for a John/Jane Doe injunction (IOW, no named defendants). This is very common in BC and some other common law provinces, and the QCSC’s rejection could end up being super important
John/Jane Doe injunctions often end up lingering on court dockets for years because, as the court here notes, they are difficult to challenge. They also give enormous discretion to police when enforcing injunctions.
… Finally, the court speaks to the alleged urgency of the situation, noting that there have been no violent incidents (including counter-protests) since the camp was erected and that McGill had already relocated convocation ceremonies.
Adam Federman@adamfederman:
Revoking visas. Cutting off financial aid. Deporting non-U.S. students. At the federal level, 7 new bills that would effectively criminalize protest in the U.S. have been proposed since the establishment of encampments on campuses across the country.
Repuglican gov’ts in Canada (e.g. Big Oil Dildo Danielle’s UCP/TBA in Alberta; Doug Ford in Ontario, etc.) will copy this Zionista fascism.
Refer also to:
