Recent rulings by federal judges in Canada have sparked significant debate, particularly regarding the interpretation of rights and land claims. One notable case occurred in July when a Toronto judge established a new Charter right to bike lanes. Justice Paul Schabas made this ruling to prevent the Ontario Conservative government from removing bike lanes from major streets, raising concerns about judicial overreach against elected officials.

In another instance, a June ruling involved a Brampton man with multiple drug charges. An Ontario judge dismissed the case, arguing that the arresting officer had acted out of systemic racism against Black individuals. This decision has drawn criticism for potentially undermining law enforcement based on perceived biases.

The most impactful ruling may be the August decision by B.C. Supreme Court Justice Barbara Young regarding the Cowichan Tribes' land claim in Richmond, British Columbia. Justice Young ruled that a significant area, including private homes, businesses, and government land, now belongs to the Cowichan Tribes. This decision is controversial because it appears to contradict the Supreme Court of Canada’s 2014 Tsilhqot’in ruling, which stipulates that Aboriginal title requires proof of continuous and exclusive occupation.

The Cowichan Tribes, primarily based on Vancouver Island, historically used the disputed area as a seasonal fishing village. They last occupied it about 150 years ago, which raises questions about whether this satisfies the Tsilhqot’in criteria. Despite this, Justice Young's ruling grants the Cowichan Tribes control over land valued at over half a billion dollars, allowing them to occupy, use, and profit from it.

The city of Richmond has warned residents that this ruling could jeopardize their property ownership status. One resident has reported difficulties with their mortgage company, which is hesitant to renew the mortgage due to uncertainties about land title.

British Columbia faces unique challenges regarding land treaties, as it has fewer agreements compared to other provinces. Most of Canada’s land was ceded to the Crown through treaties in earlier centuries, which provided First Nations with various benefits in exchange for land rights. However, the recent rulings have led to concerns that judges may question the validity of these treaties, despite the federal government investing $32 billion annually in Indigenous programs.

A recent Leger poll indicates that over a third of Canadians, including 58% of those aged 18 to 24, believe that all Canadian land belongs to First Nations. This perception may influence judicial perspectives, as some judges appear to create new rights and interpretations of existing laws, further complicating the landscape of property rights in Canada.