Steve Powley, a Métis from Ontario, fought a hunting without licence charge and ultimately won in a Supreme Court decision.

• A. He was convicted and imprisoned
• B. He won in a Supreme Court decision recognizing Aboriginal rights
• C. The case was dismissed
• D. No decision yet

Answer: (B)

Aboriginal rights and how the Supreme Court recognizes Métis hunting rights are at stake here. In Powley v. R., the Supreme Court held that Métis people have an Aboriginal right to hunt for food, protected under the Constitution, and it set out a way to determine who qualifies as Métis for those rights—the so-called Powley test. This test looks at whether a person self-identifies as Métis and is recognized by a Métis community as Métis, within the context of a historic, ongoing practice of harvesting for sustenance. Because the Court recognized this right and provided a framework for applying it, Powley’s situation was resolved in his favor under Aboriginal rights protections. The other options don’t fit because the decision wasn’t about a conviction, a dismissal, or no decision at all—the Supreme Court explicitly recognized the right in this case.