Newsweek: RYAN ALFORD, PROFESSOR OF LAW: 'First, the Emergencies Act specifies that only certain types of threats to public order can authorize emergency powers—which is why an order issued by the Governor General on Tuesday made the shocking allegation that the Freedom Convoy's activities are "directed toward or in support" of terrorism.
'It's an astonishing claim for those who have been following the protests both in Canada's capital and at border crossings closely. There is not a single violent incident that could possibly support a legally sufficient argument that the protests have been in support of or connected with terrorism.
'Second, the new Emergencies Act required a "national emergency" to be invoked, something so serious that it cannot be resolved by means of any other law or combination of laws. And yet, the two most significant challenges to the government—the blockades of the Ambassador Bridge (from Windsor to Detroit) and the crossing from Sweetgrass, Montana to Coutts, Alberta—were both resolved peacefully, and without a single act of violence on the part of either the protesters or the police. At the end of the Coutts blockade, the demonstrators lined up to shake hands with law enforcement (the same ritual that ends every hockey game). Only the protest in Ottawa remains, and evidence of terrorism, at least outside of the realm of mind-reading, remains rather thin. Moreover, Trudeau has refused to even meet with the truckers.
All of this means that Trudeau has failed to meet the requirements for invoking the Emergencies Act. His doing so is clearly unconstitutional....'