I am going to change my racial information on all forms from now on from White to Black and expect to benefit from racial set asides, anti discrimination laws, and DEI initiatives. Since the genetic differences between a White male and a Black male are infinitesimal compared to the genetic differences between male and female I don’t see why the same logic doesn’t apply here.
Most western nations do not have anti-discrimination laws to protect women that are then enforced by anyone who self-identifies as a woman. It renders the protection useless.
"In 2013, Australia’s Labour government amended the Sex Discrimination Act and removed the biological definitions of men and women and replaced them with gender identity"
This is the key point. The judge was merely following the law, as amended.
Most western nations have enacted a similar law.
In the US, most blue states have such a law, and EVERY Democrat in Congress (and Harris and Biden) are on record as supporting it as federal law.
So: don't blame the judges, don't blame the courts. They will (rightly!) follow the laws that have been lawfully enacted.
If you don't like those laws (and I most definitely don't!), then vote for legislators who will change them.
The persuasive argument from Sall Grover was that the 2013 revision was unconstitutional because the government had not satisfied all the proper procedures in making the amendment. It had never been challenged before since it had never been enforced on the basis of gender since its 2013 revision. This might still be a matter for the High Court on appeal.
Well maybe, I'm in the US and certainly don't know the intracies of Australian law. But their constitution has no bill of rights and the legislative intent was clearly to privelege gender identity over sex, so I'd be surprised if a mere procedural challenge was successful, but who knows.
The argument wasn't about whether they had followed proper procedures, it was about whether the Parliament had the power to pass the law. In this case the law was supported by both the external affairs power and the corporations power. Then there was an argument about the validity of the Queensland legislation under which Tickle was recognised as a woman (as possibly inconsistent with federal legislation), and then all the arguments about the interpretation of the federal legislation
Great commentary. Bottom line: Biological women are not safe. The politicians are duplicitous & created this disaster & don’t care. What are the biological women politicians doing about this? They went along with it? None of the biological women family members said anything to their biological male family members who are lawmakers before they passed these terrible laws?
Common sense has nothing to do with it. The amended law is quite clear, and the judge in this case followed it. The High Court can be expected to do the same.
The 'common sense' for the High Court would be to invalidate the 2013 revisions to gender identity as an unconstitutional infringement of the rights of biological women.
Judges don't "follow" laws in Australia. Their role is not only to interpret and apply the law but to also determine the lawfulness of legislation. And seeing as we really have no idea of the difference between Sex and Gender, or indeed even the existence of either, I think there is a lot of wiggle room.
Can I identify as a judge and reverse this decision?
I am going to change my racial information on all forms from now on from White to Black and expect to benefit from racial set asides, anti discrimination laws, and DEI initiatives. Since the genetic differences between a White male and a Black male are infinitesimal compared to the genetic differences between male and female I don’t see why the same logic doesn’t apply here.
So freedom of association is dead? Australia is a rogue state at this point.
Not at all. Most western nations have similar laws on the books.
Most western nations do not have anti-discrimination laws to protect women that are then enforced by anyone who self-identifies as a woman. It renders the protection useless.
"In 2013, Australia’s Labour government amended the Sex Discrimination Act and removed the biological definitions of men and women and replaced them with gender identity"
This is the key point. The judge was merely following the law, as amended.
Most western nations have enacted a similar law.
In the US, most blue states have such a law, and EVERY Democrat in Congress (and Harris and Biden) are on record as supporting it as federal law.
So: don't blame the judges, don't blame the courts. They will (rightly!) follow the laws that have been lawfully enacted.
If you don't like those laws (and I most definitely don't!), then vote for legislators who will change them.
The persuasive argument from Sall Grover was that the 2013 revision was unconstitutional because the government had not satisfied all the proper procedures in making the amendment. It had never been challenged before since it had never been enforced on the basis of gender since its 2013 revision. This might still be a matter for the High Court on appeal.
Well maybe, I'm in the US and certainly don't know the intracies of Australian law. But their constitution has no bill of rights and the legislative intent was clearly to privelege gender identity over sex, so I'd be surprised if a mere procedural challenge was successful, but who knows.
It is a long shot given the breath of the judge's decision but it is never possible to predict an appeals court with certainty
The argument wasn't about whether they had followed proper procedures, it was about whether the Parliament had the power to pass the law. In this case the law was supported by both the external affairs power and the corporations power. Then there was an argument about the validity of the Queensland legislation under which Tickle was recognised as a woman (as possibly inconsistent with federal legislation), and then all the arguments about the interpretation of the federal legislation
This is the end!
Great commentary. Bottom line: Biological women are not safe. The politicians are duplicitous & created this disaster & don’t care. What are the biological women politicians doing about this? They went along with it? None of the biological women family members said anything to their biological male family members who are lawmakers before they passed these terrible laws?
And don't forget Tickle was supported by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, also a biological woman
Does Australia not have a federal/national Supreme Court with multiple justices to which Grover can appeal?
Yes, the 7 justice High Court is the final stop. Hopefully some common sense will prevail there.
Common sense has nothing to do with it. The amended law is quite clear, and the judge in this case followed it. The High Court can be expected to do the same.
The 'common sense' for the High Court would be to invalidate the 2013 revisions to gender identity as an unconstitutional infringement of the rights of biological women.
Unlike in the US, there's no Bill of Rights in the Australian constitution, and no mention of women at all: https://www.aph.gov.au/constitution
Australia has signed up to the that protects women’s rights. The problem for women is that trans activists have been working hard to subvert it.
Judges don't "follow" laws in Australia. Their role is not only to interpret and apply the law but to also determine the lawfulness of legislation. And seeing as we really have no idea of the difference between Sex and Gender, or indeed even the existence of either, I think there is a lot of wiggle room.
Basically you're right, MarkS, but there a couple of points on which the single judge is open to challenge (even on strictly legal grounds)
Appalling. This must not stand. There is no logic, no sense, no reality!!
Speechless. Was lovely to hear your voices at least, you know I’m always looking for the bright side.