November 9, 2026
Ottawa, ON / unceded Anishinabe Algonquin Territory – Today, the BC Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) will present oral arguments as an intervener at the Supreme Court of Canada in Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights, et al. v. Attorney General of Canada. These cases concern the 2020 regulatory amendments prohibiting “assault style” firearms.
In May 2020, the Governor in Council (“GIC”) amended the Regulations Prescribing Certain Firearms and Other Weapons, Components and Parts of Weapons, Accessories, Cartridge Magazines, Ammunition and Projectiles as Prohibited or Restricted, SOR/2020-96 (the “Regulation”) to prohibit approximately 1,500 previously legal models of firearms.
Through six different applications, several applicants including individual firearm owners, firearms businesses, advocacy groups, and shooting clubs — sought judicial review in the Federal Court, arguing that the Regulation is unreasonable. The Federal Court dismissed all the applications, and held that the GIC acted within the scope of its authority under the Criminal Code, and that the decision to enact the Regulation was a reasonable exercise of the delegated regulation-making power. The Federal Court of Appeal upheld this decision.
BCCLA is intervening at the Supreme Court of Canada to argue that delegated legislation creating criminal offences, or expanding the scope of criminal liability, has significant constitutional implications. By broadening the definition of prohibited firearms, the Regulation exposes individuals to criminal prosecution and penalties of up to five years’ imprisonment. Given these serious consequences, the Court should apply a more exacting standard when reviewing delegated criminal legislation.
BCCLA Litigation Director Vibert Jack, says:
“In recent years we have seen a troubling expansion of executive power. Executive decisions are often made behind closed doors, and in ways that are shielded from judicial oversight. From regulating firearms, to approving infrastructure projects and invoking the Emergencies Act, when fundamental rights are impacted by executive action transparency and accountability are undermined.”