Conservative American influencer Candace Owens has lost her legal battle to enter Australia after the nation’s highest court unanimously ruled she could “incite discord” amongst communities, backing the government’s decision to deny her a visa on character grounds.
The High Court of Australia on Wednesday rejected the 35-year-old’s challenge to Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke’s October 2024 decision to refuse her entry ahead of a planned speaking tour. Justices Stephen Gageler, Michelle Gordon and Robert Beech-Jones jointly ruled that implied freedom of political communication “is not a ‘personal right,’ is not unlimited and is not absolute.”
In a comprehensive defeat for the far-right commentator, the court ordered Owens to pay the government’s legal costs whilst emphatically rejecting her constitutional arguments. Justice James Edelman stated in a separate judgment: “Ms Owens Farmer’s submissions should be emphatically rejected.”
Character Test Failure Cited
Owens, who uses her married name Farmer in legal proceedings, had originally applied for a visa in November 2024 to undertake a commercial speaking tour across five Australian cities. However, Minister Burke invoked his powers under the Migration Act to refuse entry based on the “character test,” which allows Australia to protect its community from visitors who would “stir up or encourage dissension or strife on political matters.
Burke’s decision cited Owens’ history of making “extremist and inflammatory comments towards Muslim, Black, Jewish and LGBTQIA+ communities which generate controversy and hatred.” The minister specifically referenced her downplaying of the Holocaust, including comments about Nazi doctor Josef Mengele, and claims that “Muslims started slavery.”
“In the current environment where the Australian community is experiencing heightened community tensions, as per the advice of Australia’s security apparatus, I find that there is a risk that Ms Farmer’s controversial views will amplify grievances among communities and lead to increased hostility and violent or radical action,” Burke stated at the time.
Christchurch Shooter Connection Raised
Court documents revealed that Burke also considered Owens’ “influence on the perpetrator of the Christchurch, New Zealand, mosque terrorist attacks,” according to Australian media reports. The 2019 Christchurch shooter, who killed 51 people at two mosques, had written in his manifesto that “the person who had influenced [him] above all” was Candace Owens.
While many experts believed the reference was intended as trolling given other sarcastic elements in the manifesto, the connection formed part of the government’s assessment that Owens posed a risk to Australian social cohesion. Owens had vehemently denied any connection to the attack at the time, threatening legal action against media outlets that suggested otherwise.
The court heard that whilst Owens already had the ability to incite discord through her 18 million followers across social media platforms, her physical presence in Australia would amplify that potential. Burke noted that Australia’s terrorism threat level had been elevated from “possible” to “probable” last year, with the national domestic spy agency reporting an “increase in extremism.”
Constitutional Challenge Rejected
Owens’ legal team had argued on two fronts: first, that the relevant section of the Migration Act was unconstitutional as it infringed upon implied freedom of political communication, and second, that if constitutional, Burke had misconstrued his powers in refusing the visa.
Unlike the United States, Australia does not have an express constitutional right to free speech. The High Court definitively rejected both arguments, stating: “The implied freedom is not a ‘personal right’, is not unlimited and is not absolute.”
The judges found Burke had appropriately exercised his discretion in determining there was a risk Owens would “incite discord in the Australian community” and that refusing her visa was in the national interest given her “controversial and conspiratorial views.”
Political Victory for Government
Following the ruling, Minister Burke described the decision as a “win for social cohesion,” adding: “Inciting discord might be the way some people make money, but it’s not welcome in Australia.”
The decision represents a significant victory for the Labor government’s approach to managing extremist content and maintaining community harmony. It also reinforces Australia’s sovereign right to refuse entry to individuals deemed harmful to social cohesion, regardless of their public profile or following.
Owens’ spokesperson told media that the influencer would comment on the court decision later on social media, but no immediate response was forthcoming. The ruling effectively bars Owens from entering Australia unless future visa applications can demonstrate changed circumstances.
Broader Pattern of Exclusions
This marks the second high-profile American to have their Australian visa revoked on similar grounds. In July 2025, rapper Ye (formerly Kanye West) had his visa cancelled over concerns he promoted Nazi ideology in his song “Heil Hitler,” which Burke described at the time as another example of content that could incite discord.
The Owens case has drawn particular attention given her massive social media following, including over 4.2 million YouTube subscribers and 5.7 million Instagram followers. The court heard extensive evidence about her controversial statements across multiple platforms, including conspiracy theories about the moon landings being faked and calling science a “pagan faith.
New Zealand Also Refused Entry
Burke’s decision to ban Owens had prompted neighbouring New Zealand to initially refuse her a visa in November 2024 on the grounds that she had been rejected by Australia. However, a New Zealand immigration official overturned that refusal in December, citing “the importance of free speech.
Despite the New Zealand reversal, Owens’ spokesperson indicated there were no current plans to visit that country following the Australian High Court’s decision.
Jewish Groups Welcome Decision
Australian Jewish organisations, including the Zionist Federation of Australia, the Anti-Defamation Commission, and the Holocaust Centre, had originally called for both Australian and New Zealand governments to deny Owens entry due to her antisemitic views and remarks.
These groups had particularly highlighted her Holocaust minimisation and conspiracy theories as reasons why she should not be permitted to spread such views in person to Australian audiences. The High Court’s decision validates their concerns about the potential for real-world harm from platforming such speakers.
Ongoing Legal Troubles
The Australian visa denial adds to Owens’ mounting legal challenges internationally. She is currently facing a defamation lawsuit from French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte over what has been described as a “relentless campaign” falsely claiming the French First Lady was born a man.
Owens had also been dismissed from The Daily Wire in March 2024 following a series of comments regarded as antisemitic and months of tensions with other staff members, including co-host Ben Shapiro.
Implications for Free Speech Debate
The High Court’s ruling is likely to reignite debates about the balance between free speech and social cohesion in democratic societies. While Australia lacks the First Amendment protections of the United States, the decision demonstrates that even implied constitutional freedoms have limits when public safety and community harmony are at stake.
Legal experts suggest the ruling sets a clear precedent for future cases involving controversial international speakers, establishing that Australia’s character test provisions can constitutionally restrict entry based on the risk of inciting discord, even when that involves political communication.
As globalisation and social media continue to blur international boundaries, the Owens case illustrates how nations are grappling with managing the real-world impacts of online extremism and conspiracy theories when they threaten to manifest as physical presence and potential violence in local communities.
Follow for more updates on Britannia Daily
Image Credit:
Candace Owens — photo by Gage Skidmore, cropped, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0
