Following the historic 2003 Powley decision, which centred on the Sault Ste. Marie Métis community’s harvestings rights, Métis communities across the Métis Homeland utilized the ruling to advance additional cases that affirmed their own Métis harvesting rights—both in the courts and through negotiations—leading to further Métis rights victories that have together benefitted all Métis people.
These included court cases like R. v. Goodon (Manitoba), R. v. Laviolette (Saskatchewan), and R. v. Belhumeur (Saskatchewan), as well as Métis harvesting agreements in Manitoba (2012) and Alberta (2004 and 2019).
Powley upheld the Métis Nation’s position that a historic rights-bearing Métis community—part of the broader Métis Nation—existed at Sault Ste. Marie and answered the question of who the Métis are for the purposes of section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. It also affirmed that the Métis have existing rights protected under Canadian law.
The Supreme Court’s recognition of Métis rights in Powley created a legal foundation for all Métis communities to benefit from and build upon in the future.
However, other legal questions remained unanswered about Canada’s relationship with and obligations to the Métis as one of the distinct rights-bearing Indigenous peoples within Canada.
This began to change when, in 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in Manitoba Métis Federation v. Canada that the Crown failed to fulfill its 1870 land promise to the Métis of the Red River Settlement. It declared this broken promise to be part of the "unfinished business" between Canada and the Métis. The court emphasized the Crown's duty to act honourably in its dealings with the Métis—and, in so doing, set the legal precedent for all of the Crown’s future dealings with Métis communities.
In 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Daniels v. Canada addressed the final major unanswered question by definitively declaring that the Métis are included as "Indians" within Section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867. Until this decision, both the federal and provincial governments denied responsibility for dealing with the Métis, resulting in a “jurisdictional tug-of-war in which [the Métis] were left wondering about where to turn for policy redress”. Daniels confirmed that responsibility for honorable dealings with the Métis rests with the federal government.
These three pivotal cases—Powley, Manitoba Métis Federation, and Daniels—together form the "Métis Trifecta" and provide an enduring foundation for the advancement of Métis rights, self-government, and recognition across the Métis Homeland, now and for generations to come.
Comments