Abstract
The Supreme Court of Canada has created a narrow framework for recognizing Aboriginal and treaty rights in Canada's Constitution by reference to historic moments of contact, assertions of sovereignty, and negotiated agreements. This approach has placed historical inquiries that search for “original” understandings at the centre of the court's jurisprudence. This article argues that law should not be equated with history in this way. It has severely disadvantaged Indigenous peoples. As a “living tree,” Canadian constitutional law should regard the “past” as a grab bag of possibilities for present reasoning, rather than as a constraint on present developments, because they do not have analogues in a bygone era.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.