Aboriginal Title in Recent Supreme Court of Canada Jurisprudence: What Remains of Radical Crown Title?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three elements in the Supreme Court of Canada's current doctrine of Aboriginal title raise the question whether there is any meaningful content left to the notion of underlying, or radical, Crown title. The first element is the sui generis legal foundation of Aboriginal title in the Aboriginal use and occupation of land prior to the Crown's assertion of sovereignty. The second is the constitutional protection of Aboriginal title, including the potential requirement of full Aboriginal consent to certain Crown proposals. The final element is the Court's stated focus on reconciliation as the overarching goal of modern Aboriginal law, and on negotiation as the preferred means of achieving it. I argue that the first two elements have already in principle largely whittled down the doctrinal content of radical Crown title, while in practice its continued recognition creates the kind of imbalance at the negotiating table that undermines reconciliation. I suggest the Court should therefore consider alternatives to upholding radical Crown title to Aboriginal land.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 it