An Australian tribunal overturned a censorship order against "Billboard Chris" Elston last Tuesday, over an X post Elston made that criticized progressive gender ideology.
Elston's post on X included a link to a Daily Mail article about a transgender member of the World Health Organization. In 2024, Australia’s eSafety Commissioner ordered X to remove Elston’s post, claiming it constituted “adult cyber abuse” under the country’s Online Safety Act. X eventually geo-blocked the post in Australia before filing its own appeal against the order.
“I’m grateful that truth and common sense have prevailed,” said Chris Elston. “This decision sends a clear message that the government does not have authority to silence peaceful expression. My mission is to speak the truth about gender ideology, protecting children across the world from its dangers."
Canadian activist "Billboard Chris" travels the world and promotes conversations about the harms of gender ideology with wearable signs. His case against the eSafety Commissioner in Australia was represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom International and by the Human Rights Law Alliance.
The tribunal found no evidence that Elston intended to harm Cook with his post. It also found that Cook's physical and mental health had not been directly harmed by the post. Elston's post does not include Cook's name.
"The post, although phrased offensively, is consistent with views Mr Elston has expressed elsewhere in circumstances where the expression of the view had no malicious intent," concluded the tribunal. "For example, his statement placed on billboards that he is prepared to wear in public ‘children are never born in the wrong body’ expresses the same idea about the immutability of biology that he expresses, albeit much more provocatively, in the post."
“This is a decisive win for free speech and sets an important precedent in the growing global debate over online censorship," said Executive Director of ADF International Paul Coleman. "In this case, the Australian government alarmingly censored the peaceful expression of a Canadian citizen on an American-owned platform, evidence of the expansive reach of censorial forces, even beyond national borders. Today, free speech has prevailed."
Under the tribunal's decision, Elston is free to voice his concerns about gender ideology on X and on his billboards.
"With this ruling, the court has upheld my right to voice my convictions—a right that belongs to every one of us," said Elston. "My post should never have been censored in Australia, but my hope is that authorities will now think twice before resorting to censorship."
The U.S. House Judiciary Committee has released a 100-page report detailing how Grant allegedly worked with the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) to encourage platforms like X to censor unpopular speech. In this capacity, she reportedly demanded takedowns of lawful content from globally accessible platforms.
As the Australian Tribunal decided in favor of Elston and the ADF, the European Union implemented further constraints on online speech. The Code of Practice on Disinformation is the latest addition into the preexisting restrictions laid out in the Digital Services Act (DSA). Under this new addition, platforms that fail to remove "misinformation," "disinformation," or "hate speech" can be subjected to massive fines or even online suspension of the platform.