Colonial recognition on trial: Keith Boucher and the structural violence of Indigenous identity adjudication in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article critically examines the legal struggle of Keith Boucher, a Mi’kmaq non-status Indigenous man from New Brunswick, to expose the structural violence embedded within Canada’s recognition regime under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. Although Boucher ultimately achieved vindication before the New Brunswick Court of Appeal, his decade-long ordeal reveals the systemic barriers faced by non-status Indigenous Peoples: colonial courts privilege written genealogies over lived Indigenous experience, delegitimizing oral tradition and cultural memory, and retraumatizing claimants. The analysis examines how courts apply blood quantum and genealogical criteria, require stringent documentary evidence, not fully considering Indigenous resilience and community affirmation. Legal recognition operates within frameworks inherited from colonial legal traditions which can limit Indigenous resurgence and self-determination. The article traces broader societal and academic campaigns that frame non-status Indigenous identities as fraudulent, entrenching public suspicion and exacerbating internal gatekeeping within Indigenous communities. Through a critical doctrinal and structural analysis, the article argues that legal recognition functions as a reenactment of colonial oversight, undermining Indigenous resurgence and self-determination. Boucher’s case ultimately exemplifies the precariousness of Indigenous rights recognition in Canada and underscores the urgent need for profound structural transformation that honours Indigenous lived realities beyond colonial evidentiary regimes.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".