The choices we make and the world they create: Métis conflicts with Treaty One peoples in MMF v Canada

Abstract

This article explores the intense fight over land between the Métis Nation and the Treaty One peoples (interveners) as it played out in the landmark Manitoba Métis Federation v Canada and Manitoba hearing at the Supreme Court of Canada. The article argues that this battle demonstrates the way zero-sum understandings of land, as well as racialized derivative title logics, animate the Treaty One peoples’ court strategy. By examining the contexts and complexities of these logics, the author shows that Treaty One peoples’ arguments undermine their own interests while also serving to undermine the formation of a coordinated Métis/Treaty One court strategy. The work uses Vine Deloria Jr’s interventions on time and the choices that make future worlds to argue that Métis and Treaty One peoples are not well served by narrowly self-interested litigation strategies. The piece concludes that shifting to a coordinated strategy would help avoid the weaknesses of Treaty One’s position while also better addressing the shared struggles of Métis and Treaty One peoples.