“Unconstitutional”. Court strikes down Minns’ draconian anti-protest laws

The Supreme Court of New South Wales has struck down the state’s strict anti-protest laws, ruling that they impose an unacceptable burden on political communication and are invalid. Stephanie Tran reports.

One landmark decision The court on Thursday declared key provisions of anti-protest laws introduced in the wake of the Bondi terror attack unconstitutional, finding they gave police sweeping powers to shut down protests in large parts of Sydney without sufficient justification.

The court ruled that “the challenged provisions violate the implied freedom of political communication.”

The court ruled that the laws were “unsuitable for the maintenance of the constitutionally prescribed system of representative and responsible government.”

Not constitutionally legitimate

“It is not a constitutionally legitimate aim to seek to discourage all forms of public gatherings within a designated geographical area for the purpose of preserving social harmony on the grounds that the act of holding public gatherings tends to cause tension and division in society,” the court said.

The issue centered on a series of laws that came into effect on Christmas Eve. Law on Amendments to Terrorism and Other Legislation 2025 (NSW), following the Bondi attack that killed 15 people.

The laws allowed the NSW police commissioner to issue blanket “restriction of public gatherings” notices over large areas.

Once enacted, these declarations effectively ended protests by preventing them from being permitted under the law. Summary Offenses Act 1988 (NSW) revokes existing approvals and allows police to break up gatherings using expanded powers. Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW).

NSW passes protest ban, Prime Minister leaves questions about armed CSG on Sydney streets unanswered

The court stated the following in its justification:

“Peaceful protest is indispensable for the people of the Commonwealth to exercise their political sovereignty.”

and the law has placed a “significant burden” on this right.

He rejected the Government’s claim that the measures were necessary to preserve “social harmony”, finding that the plan was disproportionate.

The court said the government system “does not permit the State to impose such a sweeping and indiscriminate restriction on all public gatherings.”

The constitutional challenge was filed on behalf of Blak Caucus, Palestine Action Group and Jews Against Occupation ’48.

a big win

Sydney Palestine Action Group spokesman Josh Lees said the decision was “a huge win for everyone who cares about the right to protest”.

“These laws were appalling. They were so far-reaching that the court found today that they unfairly and disproportionately burdened our rights to political communication,” he said.

Lees said the laws were used by NSW Premier Chris Minns to violently suppress protests against Israel’s genocide in Gaza and called on Minns to “take responsibility” and resign.

The challenge comes against the backdrop of heavily policed ​​protests in early 2026, including a violent crackdown on a Sydney City Hall protest against a visit by Israeli President Isaac Herzog.

Herzog protests. Paramedics were also attacked, lawyers questioned police brutality

Police brutality is allowed

The plaintiffs’ lawyer, Nick Hanna, said the laws enabled “the most violent crackdown on protesters in decades.”

“Today’s verdict makes clear that, in my view, it is inevitable that the charges brought against each and every person who participated in that protest will fail and that they will be found not guilty if they proceed to trial,” he said.

“Continuing these prosecutions is untenable and it is time for the police to do the right thing and put an end to them.”

Hanna is currently representing some of the protesters arrested during the Herzog protest.

Chris Minns is responsible

NSW Greens MP Sue Higginson said the decision raised serious questions about police behavior during these protests.

“What we saw … was police brutality on a scale we haven’t seen in this state in decades,” he said.

“I hold Chris Minns responsible for this violence because the police were acting under his unconstitutional laws.”

Higginson said the state could now face “tens of millions of dollars in civil liability claims” stemming from policing the protests under invalid laws.

Groomed, captured, deployed. How does the Israel lobby manage Chris Minns?