Setanta wrote Yesterday at 1:22pm:



Does that mean that Brandan Koschel will beat the charges?   

Setanta wrote Yesterday at 1:22pm:

That is a long walk from what Americans recognise as free speech latitude, by which many Australians assume they're also covered.

The right to openly and publicly disagree with a politician (or anyone) on political or economic matters doesn't cut it in the minds of free speech absolutists.

James Glissan

Description
I'm James Glissan, an Australian lawyer bringing clarity and honesty to the legal system.
On this channel, I break down General Australian Law, Criminal & Traffic Law, and your Rights with Police and other Authorities. My goal is to explain complex legal topics simply so you don't get screwed by the system.

Disclaimer: Content is for education only, not legal advice.







Jan 27, 2026

THE UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTH: these new “hate speech” and risk-based laws don’t just target extremists – they quietly change the legal rules that apply to you.
In this video, I break down, in plain English, the 10 ways these new laws actually affect your life, your speech, your messages, your associations and even where you can live and travel as an Australian, as well as how they CAN be reversed.

Most people think this is just “tough on hate” politics. It’s not.
These laws:

Shift us from punishment after a crime… to intervention before you’ve done anything
Put risk ahead of proof
Expand Australia’s reach beyond our borders
Hand more power to ministers and agencies, and less to courts and judges
Create a two-tier system for speech, depending on who you are and what you believe

I’ll show you:

Why you never had a constitutional right to free speech or free association in Australia.
How these laws turn your “freedoms” into permissions that can be taken away.
The 10 specific changes that matter for ordinary people, not just lawyers and politicians.
How this can affect journalists, activists, community groups, religious organisations and online communities.
What it would actually take to roll these laws back or have them repealed.

If you want to understand the system you live under – not the sales pitch – this video is for you.

Bobby. wrote Yesterday at 1:59pm:

No, incitement and conspiracy are offences already. Slander and libel are, in defamation.  Copyright and intellectual property breaches are illegal.  People are charged for their emails and phone calls to organise future criminal acts.

thegreatdivide wrote Yesterday at 4:46pm:


As adults, I think we all have a pretty good idea of what would constitute hate speech and what wouldn't.

I've not seen any legislation that has an exact checklist of behaviours to describe dangerous driving, but I'm pretty sure I'd know if I was doing it or not.

Bobby. wrote Yesterday at 5:01pm:


Not a lot of love in what he said, is there?

greggerypeccary wrote Yesterday at 5:06pm:



I reckon it's weak case.


It says.
https://www.ruleoflaw.org.au/implied-freedom-of-political-communication-case-not...

The Appeal to the High Court
Mrs Clubb and Mr Preston appealed their matters to their respective state Supreme Courts and the issues of implied freedom of political communication were removed to the High Court (Clubb v Edwards; Preston v Avery ). They argued the legislation on which their two convictions were based interfered with the implied freedom of political communication and were thus invalid.