Kwey Kwey, Many people are contacting me wondering if the very recent Daniels' decision from the Supreme Court of Canada (SSC) which ruled that Metis and Non-Status Indians are indeed Indians as per section 91(24) of the Constitution Act affects me and my court case. My response is “no it does not”. First, it is important to value that this SSC ruling does not mean the Metis and Non-Status people are status Indians as per the Indian Act, rather it means that they are indeed the jurisdictional responsibility of the federal government. Second, my court case is specifically about AANDC's unstated paternity policy where when administrating Indian status registration applications they assume situations where a father's signature is not on a child's birth certificate that he is a non-status man − resulting in many children not being entitled to Indian status. Learn more here: From Bruce McIvor http://www.firstpeopleslaw.com/index/articles/247.php From Pam Palmater http://indigenousnationhood.blogspot.ca/2016/04/daniels-v-canada-we-are-all-aborigines.html Lynn