Despite opposition from rainbow communities, the High Court has ruled in favor of allowing controversial British activist Posie Parker to enter the country.
High Court Rules in Favor of Parker’s Entry
The New Zealand High Court has ruled that the government’s decision to allow British anti-transgender activist Posie Parker, also known as Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, into the country was lawful. Parker is scheduled to speak at events in Auckland and Wellington this weekend. Immigration New Zealand reviewed her case after some attendees at her Melbourne event performed Nazi salutes, but ultimately decided she could enter the country.
Rainbow Communities Challenge the Decision
A coalition of rainbow communities, including Gender Minorities Aotearoa, InsideOUT Kōaro, and Auckland Pride, attempted to challenge the decision through a judicial review, arguing that the Immigration Minister made a mistake in giving Parker the green light to come to New Zealand. Their lawyer, Tiho Mijatov, cited Parker’s transphobic views and pointed to domestic research that shows transgender people are twice as likely to commit suicide.
Free Speech Union Intervenes
The Free Speech Union joined the proceedings as an intervener, arguing that free speech extends to all information and opinions, regardless of how unpopular, distasteful, or offensive they may be. Their lawyer, Nicolette Levy KC, stated that public order or safety is not seriously threatened by the public being able to listen to views that the applicants do not agree with.
Justice Gendall’s Ruling
Justice Gendall dismissed the application for judicial review, stating that the courts are often reluctant to intervene in discretionary decisions made by a minister. He also expressed concern that Parker had not had the opportunity to speak on the matter due to the urgency of the application. The case arose following the decision to allow Parker to enter New Zealand, which prompted rainbow support groups to file for a judicial review.
Immigration Minister Wood’s Statement
Immigration Minister Michael Wood sought advice on whether Parker’s presence would threaten security, public order, or the public interest, as outlined in Section 16 of the Immigration Act 2009. He condemned Parker’s “inflammatory, vile and incorrect worldviews,” but noted that the decision rested with Immigration NZ, who advised that there was no reason to believe Parker would pose a threat or risk to public order or public interest.
Who is Posie Parker?
Posie Parker, also known as Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, is a British anti-transgender activist known for her controversial and transphobic views. She has been invited to speak at events in Auckland and Wellington.
Why was there a controversy around her entry into New Zealand?
Parker’s entry into New Zealand sparked controversy due to her transphobic views and the potential threat her presence could pose to the safety and well-being of transgender people. Additionally, some attendees at her Melbourne event performed Nazi salutes, further raising concerns.
What was the High Court ruling?
The High Court ruled that the government’s decision to allow Posie Parker into New Zealand was lawful, and dismissed the application for judicial review filed by a coalition of rainbow communities.
Who challenged the decision to allow Parker into the country?
A coalition of rainbow communities, including Gender Minorities Aotearoa, InsideOUT Kōaro, and Auckland Pride, challenged the decision, arguing that the Immigration Minister made a mistake in allowing Parker to enter New Zealand.
What was the argument of the Free Speech Union?
The Free Speech Union intervened in the case, arguing that free speech extends to all information and opinions, no matter how unpopular, distasteful, or offensive they may be. They claimed that public order or safety was not seriously threatened by allowing the public to listen to the applicants’ views.
Why did Justice Gendall dismiss the application for judicial review?
Justice Gendall dismissed the application, stating that the courts are often reluctant to intervene in discretionary decisions made by a minister. He also expressed concern that Parker had not had the opportunity to speak on the matter due to the urgency of the application.
What was Immigration Minister Michael Wood’s stance on the issue?
Immigration Minister Michael Wood sought advice on whether Parker’s presence would pose a threat to security, public order, or the public interest. He condemned her views but noted that the decision rested with Immigration NZ, who advised that there was no reason to believe Parker would pose a threat or risk to public order or public interest.
Latest posts by GSR (see all)
- Letitia James Holds Victory Press Conference - February 24, 2024
- Is Kevin Costner Leaving Yellowstone? - February 8, 2024
- Was Kim Petras Born Male | Is Kim Petras Transgender? - February 8, 2024
- Napoleon Movie Release Date, Cast - February 8, 2024
- Is Ruby Gillman Teenage Kraken streaming on Disney+? - February 7, 2024