Section 6 of the Indian Act and "The Second Generation Cut-off Rule"-–A Factum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
i overvieW Despite Parliament’s efforts to eliminate inequities in the Indian Act1 (the “Act”) in 1985, status Indians continue to be discriminated against in relation to their ability to pass Indian or treaty status to their children. The passing of Bill C-312 resulted in numerous categories of Indians and restrictions on status which continue to target the core of Indian families for assimilation into Canada. This factum was inspired by the recent British Columbia Supreme Court (“BCSC”) decision McIvor v. Canada3 (“McIvor”) which successfully challenged s. 6 of the Act4 on similar grounds. It was held that s. 6 continues to prefer descendants who trace their Indian ancestry along paternal lines over those who trace it along maternal lines.5 The BCSC declared s. 6 to be unconstitutional insofar as it authorized the differential treatment of matrilineal and patrilineal
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".