To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
This remains a five-alarm fire. We have just days left in our Fall Campaign and the numbers we’re seeing are not good. This is terrifying for us, especially when everything we cherish is on the ballot just one week from now.
A "right-wing culture war and transphobic propaganda is never just about discourse, debate, or the 'potential for violence,'" said one gender studies professor in response to the attack. "It's about actual violence."
Police in Ontario, Canada on Thursday said the stabbing of multiple people in a University of Waterloo gender studies class was a "hate-motivated incident related to gender expression and gender identity" as they charged the suspect with several crimes.
Geovanny Villalba-Aleman, a 24-year-old former student at the school, was identified by the Waterloo Regional Police Service as the suspect and has been charged with three counts of aggravated assault, four counts of assault with a weapon, and two counts of possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose.
Villalba-Aleman is accused of stabbing a 38-year-old professor and two students, aged 19 and 20, after entering the classroom of a Philosophy 202: Gender Issues class on Wednesday afternoon and asking the professor "what the class was about," according to The Imprint, the school's student newspaper.
After the professor answered and said she was the instructor of the class, Villalba-Aleman allegedly "closed the door, took out two knives, and began attacking the professor."
A student told The Imprint that the attacker "missed the professor and 'ended up attacking one or two other people.'"
The three victims were hospitalized with non-life-threatening injuries.
The stabbing is the latest attack in Canada that was allegedly motivated by gender-related hate.
In 2018, a man killed 10 people in Toronto when he drove a van into a crowd of pedestrians, later saying he had been motivated by his anger over being rejected by women.
Wednesday's attack comes amid a surge in anti-transgender rights legislation in the United States, with right-wing lawmakers passing more than 80 bans this year on gender-affirming healthcare, discussions about LGBTQ+ issues in schools, and students playing sports and using restrooms in accordance with their gender identity.
In the Canadian province of New Brunswick this month, conservatives changed rules for public schools to "recognize the role of parents" regarding the names and pronouns children use. A previous policy, adopted in 2020, stated that teachers should respect all children's chosen names and pronouns.
"It's the first well-documentedinstance of Canada copying U.S. anti-trans policies, which usually focus on solving a problem that doesn't exist through blatantly discriminatory practices," wrote Nate DiCamillo at Quartz.
The attack at University of Waterloo demonstrates that a "right-wing culture war and transphobic propaganda is never just about discourse, debate, or the 'potential for violence,'" said Jeremy Johnston, a gender studies professor at Western University in Ontario. "It's about actual violence."
Defying new legislation fast-tracked by right-wing Ontario Premier Doug Ford outlawing strikes, more than 55,000 education workers in the Canadian province hit the picket lines Friday, vowing to stay in the streets for "as long as it takes" to secure a contract they feel is fair.
"We need our voices to be heard and for the government to realize this is not acceptable."
The Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) launched what it called "a wake-up call and a call to arms for organized labor across Canada" after Ontario's Progressive Conservative government on Thursday enacted Bill 28--the Keeping Students in Class Act--which imposes contracts on CUPE members and prohibits them from striking on pain of a $3,000(USD) daily fine per employee and up to a $371,000(USD) penalty for the union.
The new law also utilizes the notwithstanding clause to shield against constitutional challenges. The controversial legal mechanism has only been invoked twice in Ontario's history--both times under Ford.
Liberal Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called Bill 28 an "attack on one of the most basic rights available, that of collective bargaining."
\u201cThe Government has just passed Bill 28, and in so doing, trampled on the rights of education workers. I\u2019m terrified to think which workers will be next. \n\nThe Premier and Deputy Premier didn\u2019t even have the courage to appear in the chamber themselves and vote.\n\n#onted #onpoli\u201d— Dr. Adil Shamji \ud83c\udde8\ud83c\udde6 (@Dr. Adil Shamji \ud83c\udde8\ud83c\udde6) 1667512321
CUPE national president Mark Hancock said in a statement that "this isn't just about education workers, this is about the rights of all working people across the country."
"The message from our leaders here in Ontario is clear," Hancock added. "Our members are united, and they intend to fight--and they have Canada's largest union in their corner and we are going to fight alongside them."
CUPE national secretary-treasurer Candace Rennick said that "now is a moment for us to ask ourselves what kind of union we want to be, in the face of the worst piece of legislation we've ever seen leveled at the labor movement."
"Our members have spoken," she added. "They are prepared to fight. They aren't part of the largest union in the country for nothing. We are going to have their backs, and we'll stand with them for as long as it takes."
\u201cThis is a truly dark day in Ontario\u2019s history. A govt that\u2019s willing to override Charter rights, human rights, collective bargaining rights & labour law to impose contracts on low paid, mainly female, edu workers & criminalize strikes. Outrageous & unacceptable. #ontedsolidarity\u201d— Professor Carol Campbell (@Professor Carol Campbell) 1667513994
According to the Ontario Federation of Labour (OFL):
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms enshrines Canadians' right to a free and fair collective bargaining process, and the Supreme Court of Canada has found that the right to exercise economic sanctions (i.e., the right to strike) forms an integral part of that process. In addition to violating workers' constitutional right to strike, the Keeping Students in Class Act enforces a concessionary contract on Ontario's 55,000 education workers--the lowest paid workers in the education system--many of whom are women workers and workers of color.
The bill unilaterally imposes woefully low wage increases--well below inflation--on low-income employees who have previously been subjected to three years of 1% increases... inadequate protections against job cuts; no paid prep time for education workers who work directly with students; a cut to the sick leave/short-term disability plan; and many other imposed terms which penalize employees. All told the imposed compensation changes amount to a mere $200 in the pockets of workers earning on average $39,000 and facing 7% inflation.
Karen Brown, president of the Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario, said that by enacting a law that forces a contract on CUPE members, the Ford administration has chosen the "most draconian manner of legislating away two fundamental rights protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms: the right to bargain collectively, and the right to strike."
"The Ford government has signaled it is uninterested in reaching collective agreements that are negotiated freely and fairly," she added. "And its oppressive use of the notwithstanding clause is another flagrant abuse of power--one that continues to attack democracy by trampling on Ontarians' constitutional rights."
Thousands of demonstrators turned out in Toronto's Queen's Park on Friday to denounce the Ford administration and show solidarity with the striking workers.
\u201cA massive demonstration at Queen\u2019s Park today as CUPE workers hold a \u201cpolitical protest\u201d which the Ford government calls an \u201cillegal\u201d strike. \n\n#onpoli #onted\u201d— Colin D'Mello | Global News (@Colin D'Mello | Global News) 1667572863
"We need our voices to be heard and for the government to realize this is not acceptable," Maria Gallant, a school secretary, told CBC News. "We are just asking to be paid what we deserve, nothing more."
Protesters also rallied outside the office of Education Minister Stephen Lecce in Vaughan.
"You cannot rip away the rights of workers and expect... that we are just going to take it sitting down," Laura Walton, president of CUPE's Ontario School Board Council of Unions, told Global News.
Others expressed support for the strike on social media.
\u201cThe Ontario Dump Truck Association (ODTA) stands with CUPE and all workers in support of their strike action and against the deplorable use of the Notwithstanding Clause to erode and disrespect fundamental Charter rights! We urge @fordnation to negotiate. Not legislate. #onpoli\u201d— ODTA (@ODTA) 1667507886
Birgit Uwaila Umaigba, an intensive care unit and emergency room nurse who is also clinical course director at Centennial College in Toronto, dropped by a picket line to "protect our democracy."
"Doug Ford and his retrogressive conservative government crossed the line by enacting Bill 28 and banning 55,000 CUPE members from exercising their fundamental right to strike," she tweeted.
OFL announced a "Solidarity Saturday" day of action in the province, calling Bill 28 "a full-frontal attack on basic labor freedoms in Ontario."
\u201c\ud83d\udce2 SOLIDARITY SATURDAY \ud83d\udce2\n\nShow your support for education workers with a #SolidaritySaturday action in your community.\n\nWHEN: Saturday, November 5 @ 12PM - 1PM\nWHERE: Across Ontario\n\nLearn more & sign up here \u2935\ufe0f\nhttps://t.co/0cOarRdd1n #IStandWithCUPE #39kIsNotEnough #OntEd\u201d— OFL (@OFL) 1667585134
"Today is a dark day for Ontario workers. By introducing this legislation before education workers have even exercised their charter-protected right to strike, the Ford government is attempting to short-circuit the bargaining process and strip workers of a fundamental freedom," OFL president Patty Coates said in a statement.
"Doug Ford and his government are once again telling workers across the province that their rights don't matter," she added.
Last month, seven Ontario youths made history when they held Premier Doug Ford's government to account for its reckless climate policy in a court of law.
The case of Mathur v. Ontario -- the first climate rights lawsuit to have its day in court in Canada -- alleges that the government's rollback of its greenhouse gas emissions target is unscientific, unsustainable and unconstitutional. Legal experts from across the country have long argued that Canadian governments' woefully inadequate record on climate change is not only unacceptable, but may also be illegal in some circumstances. In particular, when government conduct like Ford's greenhouse gas target falls far short of what the science requires, it also falls foul of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Representing youth and future generations, the applicants in Mathur v. Ontario argue that by failing to even attempt to achieve the emissions cuts that experts say are necessary to avoid climate catastrophe, the government has violated their constitutionally protected rights to life and security of the person under the Charter. They also argue that the government has violated their equality rights, since climate change will disproportionately harm children and youth, who are more vulnerable to the existing health effects of climate change and will live more of their lives in an era of climate crisis.
In the reams of documents and hours of oral argument presented by Ontario's lawyers -- paid by taxpayer dollars -- the government never once tried to justify the validity of its target on the basis of climate science. Instead, they tried to get the court to punt the issue. First, Ontario argued that the target was only a "communications product" and not a law. The position reveals a staggering level of hypocrisy, considering that Ontario's recent opposition to the federal carbon price relied heavily on an argument that the province was already handling climate change through its robust emissions reduction target. Second, Ontario's legal team argued that climate change is too political to be dealt with by a court of law. The problem with this argument is that it totally ignores the constitutional role of courts in our legal system.
Any first-year law student knows that where a government policy violates a person or group's Charter rights, the courts not only can but must intervene. Court supervision of government conduct -- no matter how "political" -- is a cornerstone of constitutional democracy. The raison d'etre of the Charteris to prevent government intrusions on human rights. This is why Canadian courts have intervened in areas as controversial as medical assistance in dying, access to safe injection sites and (de)criminalization of the sex trade. Any of these issues could, in theory, have been resolved by voters, but at an unacceptable cost to those whose lives and quality of life were threatened by the government policies at issue. In the case of children and youth who lack the right to vote but will disproportionately bear the harmful consequences of the climate crisis in the future, turning to courts is in fact their only hope.
Before 1982, there were cases in which Canadians had no legal recourse when their human rights were violated by government actions. Since the Charter came into force, however, we are no longer at the mercy of politics to resolve issues that implicate our most fundamental human rights. As Canadians experience increasingly frequent climate-related disasters (heat domes, wildfires, flooding and hurricanes), it has become clear that climate change constitutes an unprecedented threat to the enjoyment of human rights in this country. And since our human rights are enshrined in the Charter and supervised by an independent judiciary, it seems only reasonable to seek constitutional recourse when governments contribute to dangerous climate change through unsustainable and unscientific laws and policies. Mathur v. Ontario is just one of a rising tide of constitutional climate suits in Canada. Expect more to come.