The High Court of Australia has ruled unanimously to uphold the Labor government’s decision to deny US commentator Candace Owens a visa.

‘The implied freedom of political communication is not a personal right,’ said the High Court.

Well, that’s rather depressing.

Immigration Minister Tony Burke originally denied Owens’ visa in late 2024 on the grounds she did not pass the character test and that ‘there was a risk that she would incite discord in the Australian community or in a segment of that community’.

A visa is required for the speaking tour Candace Owens had planned to undertake in Australia.

Candace Owens issued a challenge to the rejection of her visa which has today been overruled.

‘Australia’s national interest is best served when Candace Owens is somewhere else,’ said Tony Burke.

I think Australia’s national interest is best served when Labor lock themselves out of Parliament, but that’s just my opinion.

Sure, Candace Owens has said some crazy things, especially in the last 12 months, but the question I am interested in is the inconsistency of the Labor government when it comes to who they let into Australia.

Some may say Labor is applying its moral outrage rather selectively.

In particular, Burke complains, ‘From downplaying the impact of the Holocaust with comments about Mengele through to claims that Muslims started slavery, Candace Owens has the capacity to incite discord in almost every direction.’

The extensive history of Islamic slavery aside, has Burke seen what many pro-Palestinians have to say about the Holocaust and Jewish people in general?

Has he read the signs marching through our streets, many of them held by migrants or the descendants of migrants brought in under Labor’s watch?

Thousands of refugees who probably hold views more extreme than Candace Owens are welcomed in by a Labor government that knows it will play well in the polls. Unlike Owens and her fleeting tour, these individuals have a permanent impact on Australia.

If Owens’ comments about the Jewish people are a problem for the Minister and the government, Labor needs to explain its issuing of temporary visas to refugees from Gaza who almost certainly hold extreme views about Jewish people.

There are a lot of unanswered questions about the moral consistency of the Labor government.

Labor rejects a controversial speaker and then sneakily accepts the return of ISIS Brides who were part of an Islamic terrorist state. Did these women pass the character test? Forget saying crazy things, did ISIS Brides assist their husbands in committing crimes against humanity including the sexual slavery of Yazidi women?

It is said that the refusal of Owens’ visa is in ‘the national interest’ but is the acceptance of refugees with unknown allegiance from dangerous war zones in ‘the national interest’?

These can’t both be true.

The release of the High Court decision says:

‘The Minister found that there was a risk of Ms Farmer’s [Owens] controversial views leading to increased hostility and violent or radical action.’

Meanwhile, Labor has overseen a mass migration project that has led to an influx of people from the Middle East and policy decisions, such as the recognition of Palestine, which has encouraged people to take to the streets of Australia shouting genocidal chants, supporting the terrorist organisation of Hamas, and demanding the ‘decolonisaton’ of Australia.

Candace Owens isn’t disrupting Australia, but the Labor Party certainly is.

And so we ask, is the government, of which Tony Burke is a minister, guilty of what they accuse Candace Owens of doing?