this post was submitted on 23 May 2026
152 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

12015 readers
548 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works 43 points 4 days ago (5 children)

This is going to be challenged in the Courts. Many parts of this Bill is in violation of the Charter.

Hopefully, Signal and others stay until the court case runs it's course.

[–] kbal@fedia.io 4 points 4 days ago (4 children)

If it gets to the courts we're probably lost.

[–] RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works 17 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Section 8 of the Charter "Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure"

I've heard from experts that bulk collection of metadata violates section 8.

[–] kbal@fedia.io 4 points 4 days ago

Retention of metadata may not even be considered a search or seizure, it's unclear to me how likely it is that it might be declared "reasonable", taking it to the supreme court would require many years of work during which irreparable harm would be done, and whichever parts of the law were struck down it's likely that others would stand — and every part of it is irredeemable.

The whole bill is so blunt, crude, and stupid that I think there's hope that it might be somehow arranged that it gets stuck in committee until it's forgotten about.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)