Non-status Indian

In Canada, the term non-status Indian (French: Indiens non inscrits)^{[nb 1]} refers to any First Nations person who for whatever reason is not registered with the federal government, or is not registered to a band which signed a treaty with the Crown.

For several decades, status Indian women automatically became non-status if they married men who were not status Indians.

Prior to 1955, a status Indian could lose their status and become non-status through enfranchisement (voluntarily giving up status, usually for a minimal cash payment), by obtaining a college degree or becoming an ordained minister.

The 2013 Federal Court case Daniels v. Canada established that non-status Indians (and Métis) have the same aboriginal rights as status Indians, in that they are encompassed in the 1867 Constitution Act's language about "Indians".^[2] However, the 2014 Federal Court of Appeal decision "Daniels v Canada" overturned that verdict after the government appealed.^[3] In 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the 2013 verdict after a subsequent appeal on the 2014 decision. As a result, the federal government has jurisdiction and fiduciary duty over status Indians, non-status Indians, and Métis alike.^[4]

Notes

^ Indian is used here because of the historical nature of the article and the precision of the name, as with Indian hospital.^[1] It was, and continues to be, used by government officials, Indigenous peoples and historians while referencing the school system. The use of the name also provides relevant context about the era in which the system was established, specifically one in which Indigenous peoples in Canada were homogeneously referred to as Indians rather than by language that distinguishes First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples.^[1] Use of Indian is limited throughout the article to proper nouns and references to government legislation.

References

^ ^a ^b "Terminology Guide: Research on Aboriginal Heritage" (PDF). Library and Archives Canada. 2012. Retrieved April 8, 2023.
^ Pemberton, Kim (January 8, 2013). "Court decision ends ambiguity for non-status Indians and Metis, now officially 'Indians'". Vancouver Sun.
^ Rennie, Steve (November 19, 2014). "Metis, Non-Status Indians To Learn If Top Court Will Hear Landmark Case". Huffington Post. Canadian Press.
^ Galloway, Gloria; Fine, Sean (April 14, 2016). "Métis, non-status Indians win Supreme Court battle over rights". The Globe and Mail.

This article about Canadian law is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

This article relating to the Indigenous peoples of North America is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

[2] Indian is used here because of the historical nature of the article and the precision of the name, as with Indian hospital.^[1] It was, and continues to be, used by government officials, Indigenous peoples and historians while referencing the school system. The use of the name also provides relevant context about the era in which the system was established, specifically one in which Indigenous peoples in Canada were homogeneously referred to as Indians rather than by language that distinguishes First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples.^[1] Use of Indian is limited throughout the article to proper nouns and references to government legislation.

[Indian-1] "Terminology Guide: Research on Aboriginal Heritage" (PDF). Library and Archives Canada. 2012. Retrieved April 8, 2023.

[3] Pemberton, Kim (January 8, 2013). "Court decision ends ambiguity for non-status Indians and Metis, now officially 'Indians'". Vancouver Sun.

[4] Rennie, Steve (November 19, 2014). "Metis, Non-Status Indians To Learn If Top Court Will Hear Landmark Case". Huffington Post. Canadian Press.

[5] Galloway, Gloria; Fine, Sean (April 14, 2016). "Métis, non-status Indians win Supreme Court battle over rights". The Globe and Mail.

[nb 1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[1]

See also

Notes

References