# Gun Owners Challenge Ottawa’s Firearms Ban at Supreme Court The Supreme Court hears arguments on whether federal regulations overstepped constitutional authority regarding firearm bans. - **Source:** [The Globe and Mail – Canada](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada) - **Published:** 2026-11-09 - **Topic:** [politics](https://brifing.si/c/politics) - **Original article:** - **On Brifing:** https://brifing.si/s/80782895-8dd9-42e5-bc95-648ba690a4f1 ## Supreme Court Hearing Begins The Supreme Court of Canada begins a two-day hearing this Monday to review the federal government’s 2020 ban on assault-style firearms. This case represents the most significant legal challenge this fall, focusing on whether the government exceeded its authority by using regulatory powers instead of parliamentary legislation to implement the ban. ## Scope of the Ban Initially targeting over 1,500 types of firearms, the federal list expanded to more than 2,500 models by early 2025. The government defends these actions as essential for public safety, citing military-style design as the primary justification, while opponents argue the regulations are vague and lack a clear legislative mandate for such broad prohibitions. ## Government Buyback Program A federal amnesty period remains in effect until 90 days after the court’s final judgment. As of mid-2026, the government has already paid businesses $96 million for approximately 74,000 surrendered weapons. This averages to roughly $1,300 per firearm, highlighting the significant financial scale of the ongoing federal disarmament and compensation initiative. ## Challengers and Legal Arguments The case features four primary challengers, including self-represented litigants and the Canadian Coalition for Firearms Rights. Appellants argue that the ban unfairly disrupts the lives of law-abiding citizens, such as farmers and competitive athletes, while claiming that mass shootings in Canada are rare and often involve illegal weapons not covered by regulations. ## Federal Defense Strategy Ottawa justifies the ban by referencing historical mass shootings, including the 1989 L’École Polytechnique tragedy and the 2020 Portapique incident. The government maintains that the Criminal Code grants the cabinet broad discretionary authority to prohibit specific weapons in the interest of public safety, asserting that this political exercise is both reasonable and necessary. ## Provincial Opposition Stance The provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario have intervened against the federal government. Alberta and Saskatchewan argue that Ottawa overstepped its constitutional boundaries, while Ontario explicitly labels the regulations as unconstitutional. These provinces contend that hunting and shooting sports fall under exclusive provincial jurisdiction, challenging the federal government's reliance on broad regulatory powers. ## Individual Legal Challenges Christine Generoux, a self-represented appellant, argues that the ban lacks justification for recreational users and impacts Canadian identity. Her position highlights the tension between federal administrative actions and the rights of individuals who view firearm ownership as a cultural or life-sustaining activity, rather than a threat to the broader public safety. ## Implications for Governance The court’s decision will clarify the limits of cabinet-level regulatory authority versus parliamentary lawmaking. A ruling in favor of the challengers could force the government to seek formal legislation for future bans, while a victory for Ottawa would solidify the executive branch's power to enact sweeping public safety policies through the Criminal Code. ## Sources covering this story - https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-gun-users-battle-ottawas-firearms-ban-at-supreme-court/ — --- _Summary written by Brifing from the original reporting. Copyright in the original article belongs to its publisher; read the full piece at the link above._