The families of five immunocompromised children as well as the Alberta Federation of Labor (AFL) sought a review of the Feb. 8 decision to lift school mask mandates, which was made during a cabinet meeting. Court of King’s Bench judge Grant Dunlop agreed with the applicants that he should issue a statement “for the benefit of the chief medical officer and other medical health officers in considering future public health orders”. “The order was unreasonable because it was based on an interpretation of the Public Health Act as giving final authority over public health orders to elected officials,” Dunlop wrote.
LaGrange caused ‘widespread misunderstanding’
The judge also found a statement by Education Secretary Adriana LaGrange that did not prohibit school boards from imposing their own mask rules caused a “broad misunderstanding of the legal effect” of her words. “While Secretary LaGrange’s statement appears to prohibit school boards from imposing mask mandates, it does not, because the minister can only do so by regulation, and the statement was not a regulation,” Dunlop wrote in the 28-page decision. which was issued on Thursday. The judge also said a statement by Education Secretary Adriana LaGrange did not prohibit school boards from imposing their own mask rules. He wrote LaGrange’s words caused “widespread misunderstanding of the legal effect” of her statement. (Scott Neufeld/CBC) Dr. Dina Hinshaw, Alberta’s chief medical officer of health, presented a series of options to cabinet as the number of infections fell. The petition argues that the abrupt end to the cover-up order violated the charter rights of immunocompromised children, who were forced to choose between their education and their health. Dunlop did not find that the children’s charter rights were violated. Instead, he issued a “statement” that the CMOH order “is unreasonable and that Secretary LaGrange’s statement did not prohibit school boards from imposing mask mandates.” In August, attorneys for the plaintiffs, Sharon Roberts and Orlagh O’Kelly, argued that Hinshaw abdicated her authority on the cabinet and failed in her duty to protect medically vulnerable students. They said the decision to remove mask mandates in Alberta schools was inconsistent with public health advice and was instead made by government officials for political reasons, including to “crack down on protests” taking place at the Coutts border crossing. Lawyers for the Alberta government argued the order was made “in good faith, using the best judgment based on the information available at the time,” Gary Zimmermann said. Zimmermann said students, guided by their parents, were allowed to make their own decisions about mask use. The applicants’ legal team argued that the children at the center of this court case were segregated, alienated and bullied because they had to stay home from school or, in other cases, because they were the only ones in their schools who wore masks. All other public health orders were lifted on June 30, 2022.
