An Australian court handed the victory this month to an activist known as “Billboard Chris.”
The process in Melbourne ended with the overthrow of an order from Australian esaffite committee member Julie Inman Grant. Julie Inman Grant criticized Chris Elston for deleting the February 2024 post to X, criticizing the appointment of Teddy Cook, a transgender consenter, to experts from health organizations around the world.
According to ADF International, Inman-Grant viewed Elston’s post as a form of “cyber abuse.”
XX (owned by billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk) initially resisted demand from the Australian Esafety committee, but the platform ultimately decided to geoblock posts of Australia-based IP addresses. Meanwhile, both X and Elston pursued legal action against Australia.
Listen to the latest episodes of “Quick Start”
Starting March 31, Melbourne Courts began a one-week hearing to determine whether the Post constituted “cyber abuse.” Last week, court members determined that Inman Grant was incorrect to classify Christian activist posts as abusive or intentional targets as cooks.
Vice President Damien O’Donovan, who presided over the court, cited Elston’s testimony, pointing to the consistency of the activists’ views. Elston says that doing so would never use actual sex and false pronouns of a person, as it was “not true” and “impacted the rights and safety of women and children.”
The court ruled Elston’s post about Cook and concluded that it should not be subject to a censorship order from the commissioner because it did not meet the standards for abuse under the country’s online safety laws.
“I am pleased that it is his universal practice to refer to a trans person by pronouns that correspond to biological sex at birth,” O’Donovan writes.
The ruling on Elston’s favor comes with growing concern over the Australian government’s attempts to censor internationally.
In late June, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee released lengthy reports on the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) investigation and alleged cooperation with Inman-Grant. Congressional analysis revealed that email exchanges were discovered and relied on Garm’s insights in shaping her own policies. She explained that Garm has “some very strong levers at (that) disposal,” and frequently requested updates (now X) on Twitter, helping to guide her decision.
The lawmaker, led by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), is about Garm, which has direct connections to the World Economic Forum, poses a major threat to freedom of speech. The goal is to promote online safety, but conservatives raised concerns that Garm’s standards for “hate speech,” “misinformation,” and “harmful” content are highly subjective and partisan.
Elston praised the court’s decision in his favour.
“I’m grateful that truth and common sense have won,” he said. “This decision sends a clear message that the government does not have the authority to silence peaceful expression.”
He added: “My mission is to tell the truth about gender ideology and protect children around the world from that danger.”
Paul Coleman, executive director of ADF International, called the rule a “decisive victory over freedom of speech,” and denounced the Australian government’s attempts to censor Canadian citizens’ posts on US-owned platforms.
“Free speech is widespread today,” Coleman said. “This is a victory not just for Billboard Chris, but for all Australians, and for all citizens who actually value their fundamental right to freedom of speech.”
Through the global government issues team, X called the court’s decision “a victory of free speech.”
As the number of voices facing big technology censorship continues to grow, sign up for Faithwire’s daily newsletter and download the CBN news app developed by the parent company to keep you up to date with the latest news from a clear Christian perspective.
