Thread by @WinStarWilhelm

There are 510 listed participants in the injunction proceedings. Court has taken a recess because not everyone who needs to can get on the Zoom call.

Court proceeds while the IT people work on figuring out how to get everyone included on the Zoom hearing.

Mike Wills, lawyer for the Automotive Parts Manufacturers’ Association, which brought the motion of injunction, is making arguments.
#AmbassadorBridgeBlockade

They are seeking a “prohibitive injunction."
"We are asking the parties to cease and desist an unlawful blockade to clear the highways and access to and from the Ambassador Bridge."
#AmbassadorBridgeBlockade

Wills added that municipal bylaws "are being broken."

Wills said the blockade has "disrupted, reduced and in some cases stopped" vehicle assembly.
Plants including Windsor Assembly have been running at reduced capacity.

Shifts at plants including #Windsor have been cut short this week, he said.
“Down, closed, go home, don’t earn a living today. Can’t build your car."
#AmbassadorBridgeBlockade

Wills quotes affidavit from a Windsor deputy police who believes protests are “contrary” to several criminal code sections including nuisance, causing a disturbance and intimidation.

The judge replies he is “satisfied there is a serious issue to be tried in this proceeding.”

Wills said there can be no economic recovery for the losses caused by the blockade, calling it “impractical,” and “astronomical”
"It can't be fixed. It's irreparable."

Wills attempts to pre-emptively respond to potential arguments from demonstrators, including a claim the blockade has been peaceful.

“The peacefulness of demonstrating is not a deciding factor.”
Substantive issues include whether actions of defendants have been lawful. Wills says they haven’t.

Freedom of expression and assembly can't be exercised in an "unfettered manner," he said.

Another counterpoint, to the idea that a “certain amount of civil disobedience is acceptable.”
“All of the citizens of our country must be compelled to obey the law," said Wills.

“Those who engaged in civil disobedience have always been subject to the sanction to the court as a consequence,” and “are required to submit to peaceful arrest in the advancement of any cause.”

Court is on a half hour recess. But the judge assures participants all the arguments from several parties will be heard today.
"It is a serious issue and it deserves to be heard on an expedited basis."

We're back. Lawyer Jennifer King is speaking on behalf of the City of Windsor.

“I’m here to say to the court the blockage is a grave concern to the city and is having a significant ongoing impact,” said King.

King says the blockade's impact goes beyond economic woes. "It is the location of homes, schools and local businesses."

She said the right to freedom of expression does not include violating the law or impeding national and international business.

King says bridge and Huron Church are surrounded by residential areas, schools and businesses.
About 24,900 residents live in the area around the bridge, she says.

“This is about the impact on Windsor. On Windsor’s residents. On its students."

Kings says there are over 1,000 auto manufacturers in Windsor-Essex, making $5.4 billion in annual GDP
Disruption of the auto industry is a “serious economic threat to the city,” she said.
“The longer the protest persists, the more serious the impacts will become.”

She says the protest has disrupted the city’s ability to deliver critical services and is “upending the lives of residents.” The city has had to relocate firefighting apparatus.
UWindsor is affected. Two Catholic schools went to online learning today because of the protest.

Businesses are losing customers because they are afraid to go near the blockade, says King.
Residents in the west end are isolated from the rest of the city.

Kings says the protest also violates several city bylaws, including those related to highway protection, anti-idling and noise.

King says the city understands and respects the importance of democratic freedoms.
The protesters remain free to protest and get their message across provided they adhere to the laws, she says.

Josh Hunter for the Attorney General is now at bat.

Hunter says the impact and harm were clearly established by previous submissions.

He says none of the protesters have brought any constitutional challenge to the bylaws they are violating. He says bylaws must be obeyed until they are challenged and a court shoots them down.

Until the protesters challenge the laws, “they should comply with them, they should disperse and the injunction should issue.”

“There is no question” political protest is a right, said Hunter.
“But not all forms of political protest are protected.”

Blockading a bridge and a highway, making it impossible to use them for their intended use, he submits, is not protected.

Cutting off the lifeblood of a province does not promote democratic discourse, says Hunter.
"It promotes my way, or literally in this case, the highway."

Regarding Freedom of Expression:
Hunter says “you can’t use it to block access to adjoining buildings, let alone adjoining countries.”

There is a serious issue here as to the harm the protest is causing to the plaintiffs and all Ontarians," says Hunter.
It is causing harm “that can never be compensated."

"Blocking the Queen’s highway and the Ambassador Bridge goes too far," said Hunter.

Daniel Santoro with Democracy First is now arguing against the injunction.

What we're dealing with here, he says, is some commercial truck drivers who wanted to cross the bridge but couldn't because they aren’t vaccinated. So they stopped.
"That was basically their last stop."

If police have power to arrest and they haven’t, Santoro says the court should be “reticent” to issue an order without a better idea of how this will pan out.

He says the issue is not entirely if the blockade is legal.
“The ultimate question is should the court intervene in this particular scenario?”

There could be orders more limited in scope to consider before a general injunction, says Santoro.

Lawyer Antoine D'Ailly, also speaking against the injunction, says courts have held that demonstrations are supposed to cause some nuisance.

The judge cuts off D'Ailly, telling him he finds it surprising that he argues there is no evidence to establish the protest has caused a blockade and economic impact.

"The court should at least note the evidentiary basis is lacking in this case," said D'Ailly.

“There has been evidence of the economic disruption in more than one affidavit that is before me,” said Superior Court Justice Geoffrey Morawetz, “dealing with millions of dollars of damage each and every day."

James Kitchen, representing the party identifying as “John Doe," is now up. He says the harm must be irreparable.
"Very large amounts do not necessarily become irreparable."

The judge questions the stance on harm to people. "When they’re not working they’re not being paid. When they’re not being paid a number of trickle down effects occur. Am I to ignore that?’

Kitchen responds that it’s because of the vaccine mandate that other people cannot work, feed their families, move freely and enjoy their lives.

After two years of “draconian” measures, Kitchen said people are responding with peaceful protests.
They're not "on the bridge" because they have nothing better to do, he said.

Kitchen says the method here "is not just to block the bridge."
"The method is to express themselves and to do so in an effective fashion."

He says there hasn't been enough democratic discourse on the issue. It’s only happening now because of the protests. The judge cuts him off — “I’m here to adjudicate an injunction based on what is before me.”

"These are people whose voices are being ignored and oppressed," said Kitchen.
The reason for right of assembly is to have rights heard, he argues.

"The overwhelming evidence is that there is a complete blockage of the bridge, which you have conceded cannot be tolerated," the judge says to Kitchen. "It therefore follows, does it not, that there has to be some form of order?”
Kitchen answers yes.

Kitchen says if an order is issued, it should be that a complete blockage cease and some lanes should open.

Kitchen now says any order will violate rights.
"The more rights are violated, the more justification to rise up to meet it."
Any order must allow some nuisance, he said.

Kristian Langenfeld, a trucker driver, has been allowed to make submissions.

He starts by complaining the government has frozen fundraising cash for truckers protest, which prevents them from retaining lawyers.

Langenfeld says truckers have been prevented by Toronto police from protesting there.
Judges cuts him off.
“I am dealing with an injunction related to the Ambassador Bridge."

Langenfeld says an injunction will just result in the protest moving elsewhere in, turning the situation into “cat and mouse game."

Langenfeld repeatedly goes on tangents about the number of people vaccinated and the number of people involved in the protest, despite the judge repeatedly cutting him off.
“For the last time, confine your remarks to the issue before me.”

The judge finally thanks Langenfeld for his submissions and cuts him off for the last time.

We're now on a brief recess. Stay tuned.

Antoine D’Ailly is back with an affidavit hoping to show there is a limited blockade. He says there is “a big difference between a blockade versus a minor inconvenience with respect to flow of traffic."

Superior Court Justice Geoffrey Moratwetz, appearing slightly annoyed, tells him to proceed with his evidence.
"It will not be your observations, which I will be disregarding."

Waiting for the affidavit to upload . . .

Here we go.
D’Ailly describes a photo showing the “primary block” of the road is from police officers.

Morawetz says the photo doesn't show the bridge.
"How can I draw a conclusion from anything when I can’t see the bridge?"

"They’re very interesting photos but they don’t show a lot."

D'Ailly says it's actually police causing the “blockade.”
"Protesters are in no way fully blocking access to bridge," he says.
"At best we’re dealing with a partial impediment."

A person named Lyall Tryst, a private citizen, tries to chime in asking questions about the Charter.
The judge immediately cuts him of.
“This is not the time or place."

Morawetz grants the injunction.

He asks how long it will take to get a version for his consideration.

Morawetz says the injunction will take place at 7 p.m. tonight. Court will return at 5:15 p.m. to address exactly what the injunction will entail.