Alberta's legislative assembly passed the Alberta Sovereignty Within a United Canada Act three years ago. This act aims to reinforce the principle that provinces are not obligated to enforce federal laws. It also establishes a framework for challenging federal laws or policies that Alberta considers unconstitutional or detrimental to provincial rights and the freedoms of its residents.

Since the act's introduction, Alberta has taken several steps to enhance its autonomy, including the enactment of its provincial Firearms Act. These actions, along with similar initiatives in Saskatchewan and a recent Sovereignty Act motion from Alberta, may lead to tensions between the federal government and various provinces regarding the federal gun buyback program.

Resistance to federal firearms policies is not a new phenomenon. However, it has resurfaced in provinces such as Alberta, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and New Brunswick, particularly concerning the federal government's gun buyback initiative. Recently, Ontario has also expressed opposition to the program. This initiative, proposed by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, aims to compensate legal owners who surrender certain recently prohibited firearms. Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree announced last week that the program would soon be implemented nationwide.

While some provinces have merely opted not to cooperate with the federal government, Alberta and Saskatchewan have taken more assertive actions. For instance, Saskatchewan's Premier Scott Moe stated in late October that firearms would not be confiscated in the province, emphasizing that a provincial license would be necessary for any such actions. He noted, "You won’t have (guns) taken in Saskatchewan, because you would need a provincial license to go out and gather up guns. And that is currently an unfunded department."

This statement reflects a broader strategy by the provinces to assert their sovereignty and raises ongoing questions about the nature of federalism in Canada. In December 2022, Alberta announced it would take over prosecutions under the federal Firearms Act, aiming to limit enforcement actions. This means Alberta could choose not to pursue charges against firearms owners under federal law.

In March 2023, Alberta introduced its own Firearms Act, which could further prevent federal agents from seizing firearms within the province. Saskatchewan has pursued similar strategies, highlighting a significant debate regarding the structure of Canada’s criminal justice system.

Under the Constitution, the federal Parliament has the authority to define criminal offenses. However, the enforcement of these laws is more contentious, as it falls under provincial jurisdiction. Before the 1980s, provinces had the discretion to investigate and prosecute criminal offenses. This changed when the federal government began delegating enforcement powers for certain offenses, such as those related to pharmaceuticals, to the attorney general of Canada.

In 1983, a Supreme Court ruling allowed the federal government to enforce criminal law, although a dissenting opinion from Justice Brian Dickson argued that only provinces hold this authority under the Constitution. This dissent continues to be supported by some legal scholars. Consequently, the firearms legislation in both Alberta and Saskatchewan aligns with this dissenting perspective, further complicating the relationship between provincial and federal authorities regarding gun control policies.