Morning Wire - Canada Violated Truckers’ Rights & Oregon Drug Crime | 1.27.24

Episode Date: January 27, 2024

Canada’s highest court rebukes Trudeau’s excessive punishment of Freedom Truckers, Oregon reconsiders its decriminalization of drugs, and who will replace West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin? Get the facts first with Morning Wire. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The federal court of Canada ruled that Prime Minister Trudeau violated truckers' rights when he threw them in jail and froze their bank accounts. This is a huge victory for Canada and for everybody who cares about rights and freedoms. What did the ruling say and what comes next for the protesters who remain imprisoned? I'm Georgia Howe with Daily Wire editor-in-chief John Bickley. It's January 27th, and this is a Saturday edition of Morning Wire. After a controversial three-year experiment with drug legalization, Oregon Democrats moved to recriminalize drug possession. We break down the new bill moving through the legislature.

And with West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin not seeking re-election, the race for his coveted seat could hinge on a hotly contested Republican primary. From West Virginia is so Republican these days that whoever wins the Republican primary for U.S. Senate in my race is almost certainly going to win the general election. Thanks for waking up with Morning Wire. Stay tuned. We have the news you need to know. The federal court of Canada ruled this week that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's use of emergency powers during COVID was unjustified.

Judge Richard Mosley said Trudeau's actions against truckers who protested vaccine mandates violated Canada's rights charter. Here with more is Daily Wire Culture reporter Megan Basham. Hey, Megan. So listeners may recall in 2022, the government applied a variety of very severe means to pressure these, truckers to stand down. But for those whose memory might be a little foggy on this, can you start by summarizing what exactly happened? Yeah. So as Georgia noted, the trucker protest centered on COVID vaccine mandates and passports for a number of sectors, but especially for truckers that were crossing the U.S. Canada border. And they also objected to lockdown orders and mask requirements to a certain degree, not heavily, but that did play into this protest. And I will also add that these protests were

peaceful. To give you one example, the Ottawa police acknowledged that there were no riots, no injuries, no deaths. But what they did do was block streets and key roadways into the U.S. for a number of weeks. And it was also a pretty massive movement. It drew thousands of protesters to the Capitol. They called themselves the Freedom Convoy, and they filled the streets of Parliament Hill, camping out there for weeks. And I remember at the time seeing the footage of groups of people doing things like setting up barbecues, passing out food, families playing hockey in the streets. There were even some videos of kids playing in a bouncy castle. So while it was a serious protest, there was also something of a festive element to it.

And that drew a lot of international attention and support. More than 120,000 people donated over $10 million to a GoFundMe account to support these protesters. So under pressure from the Canadian government, the platform didn't actually distribute that money to the Freedom Convoy. It returned those donations. So in response to all of this, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau invoked for the first time in Canada's history the 1988 Emergency Powers Act. And he took what many considered some pretty draconian retaliatory acts, claiming to be acting to prevent terrorist financing. He froze the bank accounts of protesters and suspended their vehicle insurance. Right. That really sent shockwaves throughout Canada and the U.S.

And there were arrests as well, correct? Yeah, there were 100 people arrested on minor charges, but four were charged with stockpiling illegal guns and conspiring to kill officers if they tried to remove those blockades. So those four had been in jail for nearly two years without bail. However, this week, independent journalist Michael Schellemberger published a report saying authorities faked some intelligence

to frame the truckers as violent extremists. So I would say that's still a develop. story, and I don't want to, you know, weigh in too much on what's happening there. But in the aftermath of all of that, Canadian Civil Liberties Association and the Canadian Constitution Foundation sued. And they argued that the government's crackdown on the truckers was a breach of the country's charter of rights and freedoms. And the Federal Court of Canada agreed with that. The judge ruled that Trudeau's actions, and I'm quoting, did not bear the hallmarks of reasonableness, justification, transparency, and intelligibility, and was not justified in relation to the relevant

factual and legal constraints that were required to be taken into consideration. So he said that the use of emergency powers infringed on provisions in the Constitution. All right. So a clear rebuke of the prime minister from the federal court. Yes. Has he, Trudeau responded? Well, he hasn't reacted directly, but his deputy prime minister, Christia Freeland held a press conference Tuesday, and she made it pretty clear that the administration does not believe it did anything wrong. We do not agree with this decision, and respectfully, we will be appealing it. I would just like to take a moment to remind Canadians of how serious the situation was in our country when we took that decision. The public safety of Canadians

was under threat. Our national security, which includes our national economic security, was under threat. It was a hard decision to take. We took it very seriously. So what happens next is the case will likely go to the Supreme Court of Canada, and that could have not just legal ramifications for future use of this Emergencies Act and whether it was justified, but it could also set some precedence for how the Canadian government is allowed to respond to protests going forward. Well, we know Canada has a major election coming up next year. We'll see how this impacts Trudeau's party.

Megan, thanks for reporting. Anytime. Democrats in Oregon are moving to recriminalize drug possession after a disappointing experiment with treatment-first policies and a disturbing spike in overdoses. Daily Wire investigative reporter Marade Alortie is here with the details. So Marade, tell us what's going on with this new law. Hi, Georgia. Sure.

So Democrats on the Oregon legislature's Addiction Committee said Tuesday that they'll introduce a new bill to bring back misdemeanor criminal penalties for possessing small amounts of drugs. It's a tacit admission that the state's big drug decriminalization law measure 110 is not working as intended. Now, remind us what Measure 110 was all about. Well, Oregon voters approved Measure 110 on the ballot back in 2020. Measure 110 scrapped criminal charges for possessing small amounts of any drug, even hard drugs like fentanyl. Instead, offenders are hit with a maximum fine of $100 that is rarely enforced. Drug users can also get their fine dismissed if they call a hotline to get an addiction screening,

but according to state auditors in the law's first year, only 1% of people who received tickets for drug possession called the hotline. At the time, it was the first drug decriminalization law like this is. in the country, and voters were big fans. About 58% of Oregon voters approved Measure 110. However, in the years since Measure 110 took effect, the law has become increasingly unpopular as residents deal with rampant public drug use. Two years later, a DMH research survey found that more than six in 10 voters said they thought decriminalization has made drug addiction, homelessness, and crime worse in Oregon. A combined 63% said they strongly supported or would be somewhat interested in once again criminalizing hard drugs.

so a big reversal in public support. What would this new proposal do? So the new bill Democrats plan to introduce would add stiff penalties for using drugs in certain public places like parks. Technically, it's still a low-level misdemeanor, but under the new law, it would be punishable by up to 30 days in jail or a 1,250 fine or both.

However, there's still a provision that allows drug users to avoid charges if they complete a behavioral health screening and meet with a caseworker. The bill would also let police confiscate a user's drugs and establish stronger sentences for dealing drugs in certain places such as near parks or homeless shelters. It would also increase access to treatment, housing, and insurance. State Senator Kate Lieber, a Democrat, co-chairs the Addiction Committee and will introduce the new bill.

She said the new bill is a compromise, but also the best policy that we can come up with to make sure that we are continuing to keep communities safe and save lives. As recently as November, Lieber was still supporting Measure 110, saying it would be a mistake to overturn it and saying such a move would make a move would make a go backwards. Now, how bad is the drug crisis in Oregon now? It's pretty dismal. According to estimates from the CDC, Oregon had more than 1,700 drug overdose deaths between August of 2022 and 23. That was a 38% increase from the previous 12 months. Just to give you an idea of how fed up Oregonians are with rampant open-air drug use, in September, the notoriously progressive Portland City Council passed a ban on using hard drugs on public property. However, that ordinance can't go into effect unless the state reverses its decriminalization law. So overall, a lot of momentum to crack down on drugs in one of the

country's most progressive states. Right. And this is a shift because previously some of these progressive areas really supported this. Marade, thanks for reporting. Thanks, Georgia. With Democrat Joe Manchin's decision not to run for re-election in 2024, the West Virginia Senate race is coming down to a contested Republican primary. The primary election in the Mountain State features two prominent Republican politicians who are looking to flip the seat red. Here to discuss the race is Daily Wire contributor, David Marcus. Good morning, David. So first off, can you give us some background on this particular Senate seat?

It has a pretty unique history. Morning. Yeah, so this West Virginia seat is one that Democrats have held since 1959 when Robert Byrd was elected. He was a somewhat controversial figure, having been a member of the KKK in his youth. and he served an astounding 51 years in the Senate, which is still a record. When he died in 2010, it was then-governor Joe Manchin, who appointed a brief placeholder before winning the seat for himself, a seat he's held ever since. So for Republicans who are now heavily favored to win the seat, this is an historic opportunity.

So who are the candidates? Part of what makes this race interesting is that you have Jim Justice, a very popular sitting Republican governor, who has had a comfortable lead in the polls and the endorsement of Donald Trump, running against Congressman Alex Mooney, who's widely viewed as the more populist or, if you will, Trumpy of the candidates. Over the past few weeks, outside groups supporting both candidates have launched an onslaught of attack ads against the other. These are pretty harsh ads. Justice is accused of being too moderate. He's shown agreeing with Joe Biden on spending, for example, and Mooney's being attacked for being from out of state, monikered Maryland Mooney by the Justice Campaign. There's only been limited polling, which has shown justice with a bit of a lead, but given the ad spending from those in Mooney's camp, it looks like they think now is the time they can turn that around.

Now, let's talk about Manchin's departure from the Senate. He was always a bit of an outlier in the Democratic Party. What's his legacy going to be? And could we see someone else step into his old role? I think we tend to forget this. But for the first two years of the Biden administration, when Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, Joe Manchin was arguably the most powerful man in America. It was his refusal to budge on the filibuster, the rule that requires 60 votes for passage of most legislation, that blocked Biden's agenda time and again. There aren't a lot of Democrats willing to wear the mantle of moderate. We maybe see some of that from John Federman, Senator from neighbor in Pennsylvania, who has now taken centrist positions on the border

and Israel. Maybe he's poised to be the new mansion. Now, we talk about the Senate race as if it's a for sure win for Republicans. But is that actually the case? Are there any Democrats running who could actually win? I mean, never say never, especially in politics, but it's a very long shot. The only Democrat running is a former Marine and community activist named Zachary Shrewsbury. He's very unlikely to win a general election, which is really why he's the only one running in the primary. So the question isn't so much whether a Republican will win, but what kind of Republican, especially given the power struggle happening in the Senate GOP, where there's increasing frustration with minority leader Mitch McConnell,

who some populist's view as too much of an establishment figure and also happens not to be a big fan of Donald Trump. There's reason to think that justice notwithstanding the Trump endorsement would be more of an ally to McConnell, so it'll be worth watching how both he and Mooney addressed the question of Senate leadership as the race goes on, with voting taking place on May 14th. Well, an interesting race to watch.

David, thanks for coming on. Thanks for having me. Thank you for listening this morning. We created this show to bring more balance to the national conversation. If you love our show and stand with that mission, consider subscribing, giving us a five-star rating, and most importantly, sharing our podcast with a friend.

Thanks for waking up with us. We'll be back later this afternoon with an extra edition of Morning Wire.