Australia’s High Court has backed the government’s decision to deny a visa to US rightwing commentator Candace Owens. The court issued its ruling on Wednesday, confirming the Minister’s action did not violate any implied constitutional freedoms.
Background on the Visa Denial
In October 2024, Tony Burke, Australia’s Home Affairs Minister, rejected Owens’ visa application. He expressed concern that her views might incite discord within the country. Burke specifically noted that Owens failed to meet the “character test” required under the Migration Act.
Concerns Over Public Safety
The Minister cited Owens’ history of controversial statements, including remarks about historical events and various communities. According to Burke, these comments posed a risk of increasing hostility or encouraging violence.
High Court Ruling
The unanimous ruling reaffirmed that the Minister’s decision was justified. It clarified that the section of the Migration Act concerning character assessments applies when there is a potential for stirring conflict within the Australian community.
Arguments Presented
- Owens sought judicial review to challenge the validity of the refusal.
- Her legal team argued the character test discriminates against non-mainstream political views.
- Perry Herzfeld SC claimed the term “inciting discord” is subjectively defined.
Key Quotes and Justifications
Justice James Edelman addressed the necessary balance between freedoms, quoting philosopher Isaiah Berlin. He stated, “Freedom of some must at times be curtailed to secure the freedom of others.” He emphasized that threats designed to convey political messages violate individual rights.
Minister’s Defense of Decision
After the ruling, Burke hailed it as a victory for social cohesion within Australia. He underscored that while some may profit from inciting discord, such behavior is not acceptable in the country.
Financial Implications
The High Court ruled that Owens was not entitled to any relief and mandated her to cover the defendants’ legal costs. Further comments from Owens or her Australian solicitors were not immediately available.
