The Supreme Court of Canada began hearing arguments on November 9 and 10, 2026, in a legal challenge to the federal government’s 2020 prohibition on approximately 1,500 models and variants of assault-style firearms, a case that could have significant implications for firearms regulation and federal cabinet authority.
The country’s highest court is examining four consolidated appeals challenging the legality of the ban introduced by the Liberal government in May 2020. The proceedings centre on whether the federal cabinet acted within its authority under the Criminal Code when it prohibited the firearms through regulation.
Legal challenge questions federal cabinet’s authority
A central issue before the Supreme Court is whether the Governor in Council, or federal cabinet, exceeded the regulatory powers delegated to it under Canadian law.
The appellants argue that the government overstepped its legal authority by prohibiting firearms that they contend have legitimate hunting and sporting applications.
Their challenge focuses partly on Section 117.15(2) of the Criminal Code, which restricts the government’s ability to classify firearms as prohibited if they are reasonable for use in Canada for hunting or sporting purposes.
The court is also examining whether regulatory language referring to firearm “variants or modified versions” is sufficiently clear to provide owners with adequate notice of which weapons are prohibited.
The dispute raises broader questions about the balance between public safety objectives, lawful firearm ownership and the limits of executive regulatory authority.
Gun-rights organizations and provinces participate in proceedings
The legal challenge involves the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights and individual appellants, including Christine Generoux, Michael John Doherty and Jennifer Eichenberg, who have pursued their cases through the federal court system.
The provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario are participating as interveners in support of arguments challenging the federal restrictions.
Gun-control organizations, including PolyRemembers and the Canadian Coalition for Gun Control, are also participating in the proceedings, defending the prohibition as an important public safety measure.
Supporters of the ban maintain that restricting access to certain firearms is necessary to reduce the risks associated with weapons designed or capable of delivering substantial firepower.
Opponents argue that the regulations unfairly affect licensed firearm owners and restrict access to weapons historically used for lawful sporting and hunting activities.
Lower courts previously upheld federal restrictions
The Supreme Court proceedings follow two earlier judicial decisions that rejected challenges to the federal government’s firearms regulations.
In October 2023, the Federal Court dismissed the original legal challenge, finding insufficient grounds to overturn the regulations.
The Federal Court of Appeal subsequently rejected the appeal in April 2025, leaving the federal prohibition in place.
The appellants have now brought the dispute before the Supreme Court, seeking a final determination on whether the government exercised its regulatory authority lawfully.
Federal firearms amnesty remains in effect
While the legal proceedings continue, an existing federal amnesty provides temporary protection from criminal liability under specified conditions for individuals who lawfully possessed firearms affected by the 2020 prohibition.
The amnesty period has been extended and is scheduled to remain in effect until 90 days after the Supreme Court delivers its final ruling.
A decision is anticipated in 2027, although the court has not established a definitive date for its judgment.
The outcome could clarify the scope of federal cabinet powers in regulating firearms and determine whether the 2020 prohibition can continue under its existing legal framework.
The case also represents a significant test of how Canadian courts interpret the relationship between public safety regulations, statutory protections for hunting and sporting firearms, and the government’s authority to classify weapons as prohibited.
