To people from other countries, but especially Americans, this part is important:
The mother of a trans teenager mounted a legal challenge which was heard in the Supreme Court in Brisbane – arguing the directive was unlawful because the correct processes had not been followed.
In his written decision, Justice Callaghan said the proceedings were not concerned with the merits of the directive.
“They are concerned solely with the legal requirements that attend any decision of this nature, irrespective of the subject matter,” he said.
Courts in Australia are almost never political activists in the way they are in America. They apply the law as it is actually written. In this case, the Health Minister has the power to give directives like this, but is legally required to consult first. I don’t believe the Minister would need to side with the preponderance of evidence in such a consultation, but the process must be followed. This is a big win for now, but if he’s determined, it’s very possible for him to undergo that consultation and reinstate the ban.
IANAL, but I suspect that if consultation was undertaken, even a small vocal minority would be enough weight for the Minister to be permitted to make this directive, and it would probably require near-unanimity against the decision for the directive to be unlawful.
I’m celebrating the wins that I can, but yeah unfortunately I agree with your assessment. Thanks for the additional context 🩷
Damn, I didn’t think they’d be quite that quick with it…
Fucking pieces of shit. I hope they rot in hell
Late on Tuesday afternoon, Health Minister Tim Nicholls announced in Queensland Parliament that he would issue a health directive, effective immediately, to resume the freeze.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-28/qld-puberty-blockers-ban-overturned-by-court/105942094
is this what you are talking about?
Do we know when the freeze goes back into effect?
Yeah, I posted the actual minister’s statement in !news@aussie.zone.
This direction operates on and from 28 October 2025.
So, it goes back into effect as of yesterday.
fuuuuuuuuuuck
Overturns blocker ban
This is a triple negative. No chance I can figure out what’s it about.
I think I’ll ask AI, maybe it makes things clearer.
No it’s not. “Overturns ban” isn’t hard to understand in that sentence. The things that are no longer banned, because the ban was overturned, are called “blockers”. If you’re not able to figure this sentence out on your own, I would recommend adult reading comprehension courses. Help is available. There’s no need to turn to AI for help, that hurts the environment.






