Government 'must appoint two big C conservatives' to the High Court | Sky News Australia

  • 📰 SkyNewsAust
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 19 sec. here
  • 2 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 11%
  • Publisher: 78%

Australia Headlines News

Australia Latest News,Australia Headlines

The Institute of Public Affair’s Daniel Wild says the Coalition government “must appoint two big ‘C’ conservative justices to the High Court” when the next two vacancies on the bench arise this term.

The High Court on Tuesday handed down a judgement that people who identified as Aboriginal but were not Australian citizens could not be considered ‘aliens’ and therefore cannot be deported.

The decision, described by Mr Wild as “one of the most radical decisions ever made”, is emblematic of “divisive identity politics that has infested the High Court”. Mr Wild told Sky News host Andrew Bolt if the government appointed two “big ‘C’ conservatives” to the High Court, a decision like Tuesday’s will “never happen again”. Image: News Corp Australia


Thank you for your comment. Your comment will be published after being reviewed.
Please try again later.

TheIPA Oh yes. Let us set up your and Roscam's life achievements,intellect and academic qualifications against those of Edelman and the other majority judges

emlafudd Well there’s a reason to do exactly the opposite....

TheIPA Hi Brainiacs, is the kind of appointees you are referring to?

The IPA definitely has a few big ‘Cs’.

So the IPA's Daniel Wild thinks that appointing high court judges who will always make judgments based on ideology rather than the law is a good thing? The IPA exposes itself as a threat to our democracy. auspol

LyleShelton This sounds awesome make autsralia great again

Are there any?

Spanish inquisition next?

LyleShelton Of course take us back to the 19th century culture.

LyleShelton Judges are supposed to be impartial if they are big ‘C’ and true ideologist how can they be impartial?

the IPA is full of big Cs - they should just put themselves forward for noms

figures the IPA would favour more C-words on the High Court.


Agreed. I didn’t know we had a couple of Leftie (racist) nutjobs on the High Court.

LyleShelton unelected swine like daniel wild should learn to butt out of business that doesnt concern them

TheIPA Why? Why can't we have judges whose job it is to judge cases? Why does the IPA get to politicise the law?

TheIPA You would be hard pressed to find a non-lefty lawyer to appoint! Maybe a few ex prosecutors who are used to fighting crooks and see through their lies are better than those defence guys who sold their souls for $$ auspol

TheIPA The Institute of Pedophile Associates is now trying to influence the High Court on behalf of Uncle Rupes and mother of the year Gina. The IPA the Australian equivelent of ISIS where do these maggots (IPA) draw the line what gives these germs the right to dictate our judicary

LyleShelton Elementary my dear Watson but will it be done, that's another question?

TheIPA Does the TheIPA pay tax? 🤔

Tyupical of IPA shrills, trash everything in the name of 'conservative'. The High Court must be appointed on legal grounds, not political be it conservative, progressive, or anything else. Its probably the only independent institution left in our system. And maybe the ABC.

wow! they want to stack the HC bench now ( as well as everything else) We used to be a proudly democratic country once

LyleShelton Lol. Conservative “think” tank reckons the HC isn’t ideologically conservative enough. You think? 🤔

LyleShelton Daniel Wilde and IPA should stop trying to influence our legal system in favour of them and their rich supporters.

So does that mean anyone can say “ I identify as aboriginal “ even if their Chinese, islander, Irish european or any other place of origin? I’m confused by this ruling, can anyone explain please?

But Australia is not the USA. Senior lawyers/QCs/Fed and Supreme Court judges - those who may become HC judges- views on key legal issues are not on display as much here. We don’t have a process of interrogation prior to appointment. Another stupid idea from TheIPA

That's in nobody's interest. The law shouldn't be partisan.

Merit TheIPA Yank Murdoch interfering in our society again.

Rigging the High Court to favour Murdoch & Rinehart would be standard operating procedure for The IPA. Tilting the judicial system in their favour is one of the reasons they exist. Look at what’s happened in The HoR & The Senate already. auspol gameofmates

Doesn't that mean Australia's high court will be similar to how Trump is managing the US supreme court?

More LNP stacking?

Oh ffs, seriously... you people working at Sky, don’t you ever just want to put in your notice and move on? Do it, you will not regret it.

LyleShelton If ur retweet is endorsement neither you nor Sky or IPA have any clue how judges work especially if they perceive they are put there to do govt’s bidding.They take the role as independent third arm of govt. seriously. Shoehorning them into a political narrative is dumb & wrong.

Separation of powers is required dickheads

Absolutely incorrect, but understandable that Sky would promote this, considering who pays the bills.

The IPA can fuck right off. Nobody elected them.

2006: TheIPA predicted that banning smoking in public places would increase risk of passive smoking as smokers moved to private areas, and that without cigarette smoke, nightclubs would have to 'deodorise sweat and flatulence' with scented smoke. auspol

TheIPA is big on freedom, except perhaps freedom of information. If you want to know who funds this right-wing “think tank”, it won’t tell you. LNPlies auspol2020

Go home IPA, you're drunk.

We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:

 /  🏆 7. in AU

Australia Latest News, Australia Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

High Court decision should have been 'put to the people in a referendum' | Sky News AustraliaThe Australian’s Legal Affairs editor Chris Merritt says Tuesday’s high court judgement that Aboriginal Australians cannot be deported even if they’re not Australian citizens has “elevated a racial distinction to a point of constitutional privilege”.\n\nThe government was seeking to deport Daniel Love and Brendan Thoms for serious crimes committed while in Australia.\n\nBoth men were born overseas with neither holding Australian citizenship, but they self-identified as Indigenous and argued they should not be considered aliens under immigration law. \n\nThe High Court ruled in their favour - declaring Aboriginal Australians have a 'special connection' to the country and can not be deported regardless of citizenship status.\n\nMr Merritt told Sky News host Peta Credlin the decision “would have never been accepted if it were put to the people in a referendum”.\n\n“It limits the ability of the federal government to protect Australians from foreign criminals,” he said.\n\nImage: Associated Press White guilt... Why is Josh Frydenberg still in parliament? He's a DUAL citizen. They were here 60,000 years ago, when did Chris Merritt arrive on the scene?
Source: SkyNewsAust - 🏆 7. / 78 Read more »

‘Divisive and wrong’ for High Court to rule Indigenous people cannot be deported | Sky News AustraliaSky News host Chris Kenny says “the decision by the High Court” for non-citizens convicted of serious crimes to be protected from deportation from our shores if they have Aboriginal heritage “is a landmark ruling and one that is deeply worrying for this country”.\n\nMr Kenny said the ruling was a “watershed” as it “clearly gives a special right to Indigenous Australians,” and “is divisive and wrong”.\n\n“The key threshold here is that the highest court in our land has deemed that we are not all equal under the law, that there are special rights for Indigenous people,” he said.\n\n“What Mabo did on native title was really to give Indigenous Australians equal property rights to their fellow Australians.\n\n“This decision does the opposite, it confers a special right, not based on ownership of land, not based on property rights, but based on race.”\n\nImage: News Corp Australia Deport Chris Kenny for crimes against humanity and promoting fake, reprehensible opinions in defiance of any actual facts For those who might not understand this decision, this rewording might help, Australians right to remain in their own land recognised, the citizenship question is the result of Aborigines being a minority in their own land subject to a government which is very slowly 1/2 And there’s your proof. Chris Kenny and SkyMurdochMedia are racist as they come.
Source: SkyNewsAust - 🏆 7. / 78 Read more »

High court ruling on Indigenous citizenship marks a 'watershed moment': Kenny | Sky News AustraliaIndigenous Affairs Minister Ken Wyatt says the recent High Court ruling pertaining to deportation laws may only “appear to have a wide reach” when in fact it will be quite “narrow in [its] scope”. \n\nThe high court decision confers a new right not to be treated as an 'alien' to non-citizens who have Aboriginal heritage.\n\nSky News Host Chris Kenny said that the ruling marks a “watershed moment in terms of our constitution and how it is being interpreted.” \n\nPrime Minister Scott Morrison had also initiated a “new approach” to Closing the Gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians on Wednesday. \n\nMr Wyatt said this involved a “directional shift” which would “listen to voices at the local and regional levels”.\n\nImage: News Corp Australia
Source: SkyNewsAust - 🏆 7. / 78 Read more »

'Polarising' High Court decision fails the 'pub test' | Sky News AustraliaThe High Court’s 'polarising' judgement on convicted Indigenous deportation laws simply “doesn’t pass the pub test,” according the Courier-Mail's Renee Viellaris.\n\nThe High Court on Tuesday declared – in a 4-3 decision – that people “identifying as Aboriginal” could not “be considered ‘aliens’” - and subsequently cannot be deported even if they are foreign nationals, the Sky News host Peta Credlin had said. \n\nMs Viellaris told Sky News host Peta Credlin this decision “was always going to be polarising”. \n\n“This type of stuff enrages people because it’s seen as going too far … [and] it doesn’t pass the pub test”. \n\nMs Viellaris said Australians don’t like the concept of having “two sets of rules” for people within the nation. \n Are they going to do mandatory DNA Testing to prove these so-called 'Indigenous Deportees' are really of Indigenous heritage?! The pub test, the gold standard in red herrings. Only marginal above unseasonal weather... No it doesn’t. Judicial activism at its finest.
Source: SkyNewsAust - 🏆 7. / 78 Read more »

PM knows the 'public won't cop' High Court decision | Sky News AustraliaSky News host Alan Jones says Australians are “being told to cop” Tuesday’s High Court decision as the judgement can only be overturned by a referendum or by a future High Court.\n\nThe High Court on Tuesday handed down a judgement that people who identified as Aboriginal but were not Australian citizens could not be considered ‘aliens’ and therefore cannot be deported.\n\nMr Jones said the High Court “defined a new category person described as a belonger,” which is neither an ‘alien’ nor a citizen.\n\n“Scott Morrison must be shaking his head knowing the public won't cop this,” he said.\n\nImage: Getty\n Why does Alan hate Australia? If he doesn't like our way of doing things he can bugger of to a cottage in Soho, London. Morrison won't do a thing, he is barely better than weak as piss Turnbull. One day a coalition PM will grow a spine. Australian politics is like licking sand paper.
Source: SkyNewsAust - 🏆 7. / 78 Read more »

High Court finds two Aboriginal men are not 'aliens' despite being born outside AustraliaBreaking The High Court has decided two men who identify as Indigenous are not 'aliens'. Drain the swamp! circumventing ones crimes and betrayal of the community lived within by virtue of one's descent and heritage is outrageous, even more so when considering the absence of citizenship or birth within the country to which both claim recourse; identity is not a replacement for the law Quite simply we shouldn’t be allowed as the high court has decided, to put in place laws that mean Indigenous Australians can be deported. I am however not advocating for no punishment for crimes committed.
Source: SBSNews - 🏆 3. / 89 Read more »