high court

30 August 2023

In this article, Dr Peter Ridd contextualises and disseminates the findings of the IPA’s research into quality assurance in science, conducted as part of the IPA’s Project for Real Science Program. The Project for Real Science is an initiative of the Institute of Public Affairs to rebuild the integrity of scientific research in Australia. A Canadian court has ruled that

21 August 2023

The Institute of Public Affairs recently received legal advice from leading Victorian barrister and constitutional law expert Mr Stuart Wood KC about the lawfulness of the proposed referendum question to insert into the Australian Constitution an ‘Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice’. The federal government has proposed the following referendum question for voters to answer: A Proposed Law: to alter

18 January 2023

“Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s assertion in recent interviews that the Indigenous-only Voice to Parliament would not be ‘justiciable’ is either ill-informed or deliberately misleading,” said Daniel Wild, Deputy Executive Director of the Institute of Public Affairs. As a democracy, the separation of powers guides the governance of Australia. This means an elected government cannot tell the High Court how to

23 September 2020

This week saw the death of Ruth Bader Ginsberg and immediate controversy about who will replace her on the United States’ Supreme Court, as the Democrats invent reasons to stall the process. The panellists reflect on the career of a remarkable advocate and jurist, and examine how the Republican push in the Senate to confirm a Trump nomination as replacement

10 March 2020

The progressive reaction to calls for capital-C legal conservatives to be appointed to the High Court — that it would politicise the judiciary — is an insincere attempt to retain its power over the legal establishment. The High Court’s decision in February that indigenous Australians should be treated differently in the Constitution because of their racial identity was the most

21 February 2020

The utter failure of the federal Coalition, after almost seven years in government, to do anything to arrest the left-wing political activism of Australia’s institutions of government and administration was on full display last week. It’s one thing (as bad as it might be) for the ABC, or the Canberra public service, or the country’s taxpayer-funded universities to indulge themselves

13 February 2020

The High Court’s decision on Tuesday to exempt an entire group of people based on their racial identity from the operation of national migration laws is the most radical instance of judicial activism in Australian judicial history. The High Court’s decision concerned two individuals who were not born in Australia and were not Australian citizens but who claim biological descent

11 November 2017

The High Court’s decision last month to disqualify five federal parliamentarians for being dual citizens represents the worst excesses of judicial activism in Australia. In deciding that deputy PM Barnaby Joyce and Senators Fiona Nash, Malcolm Roberts, Scott Ludlam, and Larissa Waters were ineligible for parliament for being citizens of a foreign power, the High Court has not only confirmed

1 November 2017

While seemingly a win for freedom of speech, the High Court’s decision highlights why we shouldn’t rely on the judiciary to resolve contentious public policy questions. Two weeks ago the court partially invalidated Tasmania’s Workplace (Protection from Protestors) Act 2014 following a challenge by former Greens leader Bob Brown. Dr Brown was briefly arrested in January last year for failing