Ezra is bullshitting.
He quotes paragraph  in the Warman v. Ouwendyk case:
The hearing on the question of the constitutional validity of the impugned sections of the Act will be deferred pending the outcome in Lemire. If the complaint is substantiated, the Tribunal will not issue any order until the final determination by the Courts of the constitutional question.
But the important section is 
...If the Respondents do not engage in the impugned conduct again in the future, they will have nothing to fear from such an Order. In view of the ruling by the Chairperson of the Tribunal, Mr. J. Grant Sinclair, referred to earlier in this Decision, this Order will not be issued until a final determination by the Courts of the constitutional question in the Lemire case.
In both places Lustig is referring to a previous ruling by Mr. J. Grant, and this applies specifically (and exclusively) to Ouwendyk, the reason being that Mr. Ouwendyk is flogging a constitutional challenge similar to M. Lemire's , and the final conclusion of the former's case has been made dependent on the resolution of the latter's (to kill two challenges with one ruling, as it were).
So unless you think Lemire's challenge has a prayer, don't start hating yet, little Levantians, esp. if you've already been tagged once in a complaint. And, Ezra, you're going to get a few of your acolytes hurt if you keep on like this.
Although I would like to see Shaidle crank out drivel under the impression that she was entirely off the hook. I bet she's running her mouth pretty close to full bore now, and you wouldn't see much difference.