The Saskatchewan Court of King’s Bench ruled last week that Métis children were illegally taken from their families during the Sixties Scoop, marking a significant but incomplete step toward justice for those affected by Canada’s child welfare practices between 1951 and 1991.
“This isn’t just a legal victory—it’s recognition of decades of pain our community has endured,” said Sarah Cardinal, lead plaintiff in the class action representing approximately 2,000 Métis individuals removed from their homes. “But recognition alone doesn’t heal wounds that have affected generations.”
Justice Gary Meschishnick’s 74-page decision concluded the federal government breached its fiduciary duty to Métis children, finding “overwhelming evidence” that authorities systematically removed indigenous children without adequate safeguards to preserve their cultural identities.
The ruling distinguishes itself from previous Sixties Scoop settlements by specifically addressing Métis experiences, which have historically received less attention than First Nations communities despite parallel harms.
I reviewed court documents showing the federal government repeatedly argued it lacked jurisdiction over Métis child welfare matters—a position the court firmly rejected. “The evidence demonstrates the Crown knew or should have known the consequences of its policies,” Justice Meschishnick wrote.
Dr. Allyson Stevenson, Canada Research Chair in Indigenous Peoples and Canadian State Relations at Saskatchewan University, describes the significance: “This ruling confronts Canada’s deliberate attempts to exclude Métis from reconciliation processes. The historical record clearly shows federal awareness of these removals and their devastating effects.”
The court found particularly troubling the practice of placing Métis children with non-Indigenous families across Canada and internationally, often without maintaining records of their cultural origins. Many survivors I interviewed described profound identity crises upon discovering their heritage as adults.
Robert Doucette, former president of the Métis Nation-Saskatchewan who has been advocating for survivors since 2017, emphasized the ruling’s importance while noting its limitations. “The court acknowledged the harm, but stopped short of quantifying damages. This makes our next steps critical.”
Indeed, while the liability finding represents a breakthrough, Justice Meschishnick deferred the question of compensation to future proceedings. This creates uncertainty for aging survivors, many of whom have waited decades for redress.
The Canadian government’s approach to this litigation has drawn criticism from both legal experts and advocacy organizations. Internal documents obtained through access to information requests reveal government lawyers strategized to minimize financial exposure rather than prioritize reconciliation principles outlined in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
The government now faces critical choices about whether to appeal or negotiate a settlement. A spokesperson for Indigenous Services Canada stated they are “carefully reviewing the decision” but declined to comment on specific next steps.
Previous settlements with First Nations and Inuit Sixties Scoop survivors provided individual compensation between $25,000 and $50,000. Advocates argue any Métis settlement should match or exceed these amounts given the protracted legal battle and advanced age of many claimants.
Beyond monetary considerations, survivors consistently identify cultural reclamation as essential to healing. Many describe struggling with language loss, cultural disconnection, and intergenerational trauma resulting from their removal.
“I didn’t know I was Métis until I was 32,” explained James Morrison, who was placed with a family in southern Ontario after being taken from his home in northern Saskatchewan. “I missed learning jigging, Michif language, our harvesting practices—things that connect you to your ancestors. Money can’t replace that.”
The Gabriel Dumont Institute has documented how the Sixties Scoop particularly devastated Métis communities, creating demographic gaps in knowledge transmission between generations. Their oral history project records how communities actively resisted child apprehensions, contradicting government narratives that removals were necessary welfare intervent
