US State Department: ‘We are monitoring’ prosecution of UK woman in abortion facility ‘buffer zone’ case and ‘are concerned about freedom of expression’ in Britain

Livia Tossici-Bolt holding her sign in the UK
  • Verdict for Livia Tossici-Bolt, Christian woman who faced criminal trial for holding a sign offering consensual conversation in censorial abortion facility ‘buffer zone’ in Bournemouth, will be released on Friday
  • ADF International is supporting her legal defence
  • US State Department: ‘We are concerned about freedom of expression in the United Kingdom… We are monitoring [Dr Tossici-Bolt’s] case’

BOURNEMOUTH (1 April 2025) – A bureau within the US State Department said on Sunday it is “monitoring” the abortion facility “buffer zone” case of a Dorset woman, ahead of the release of her verdict on Friday.

The Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, & Labor (DRL), a bureau within the United States Department of State, issued a statement on the case of Livia Tossici-Bolt, 64, on X, saying: “We are concerned about freedom of expression in the United Kingdom… We are monitoring [Dr Tossici-Bolt’s] case.”

Dr Tossici-Bolt faced criminal trial this month for holding a sign that said, “Here to talk, if you want,” in a censorial abortion facility “buffer zone”.

Her verdict will be handed down by District Judge Orla Austin on Friday April 4. ADF International is supporting Dr Tossici-Bolt’s legal defence.

In its post, the State Department bureau said: “U.S.-UK relations share a mutual respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. However, as Vice President Vance has said, we are concerned about freedom of expression in the United Kingdom.

“While recently in the UK, DRL Senior Advisor Sam Samson met with Livia Tossici-Bolt, who faces criminal charges for offering conversation within a legally prohibited ‘buffer zone’ at an abortion clinic. We are monitoring her case. It is important that the UK respect and protect freedom of expression.”

Dr Tossici-Bolt said: “I am grateful to the US State Department for taking note of my case. Great Britain is supposed to be a free country, yet I’ve been dragged through court merely for offering consensual conversation. I’m thankful to ADF International for supporting my legal defence.

“Peaceful expression is a fundamental right—no one should be criminalised for harmless offers to converse.”

She added: “It is tragic to see that the increase of censorship in this country has made the US feel it has to remind us of our shared values and basic civil liberties.

“I’m grateful to the US administration for prioritising the preservation and promotion of freedom of expression and for engaging in robust diplomacy to that end.

“It deeply saddens me that the UK is seen as an international embarrassment when it comes to free speech. My case, involving only a mere invitation to speak, is but one example of the extreme and undeniable state of censorship in Great Britain today.

“It is important that the government actually does respect freedom of expression, as it claims to.”

Responding to DRL’s comment, barrister and Legal Counsel for ADF International Jeremiah Igunnubole said: “The UK’s censorship crisis is the result of a longstanding failure by British politicians to vigilantly protect fundamental rights in the UK, while hypocritically claiming to champion them abroad.

“We cannot consistently claim the UK is a bastion of free speech when law-abiding citizens like Livia are prosecuted for nothing other than peacefully offering to speak to people. What freedom do we have if citizens cannot offer a consensual conversation in a public space?

“Today, authorities are targeting conversations and even silent prayers they say are related to abortion. Tomorrow, it could be any other topic that goes against the mainstream perspective, as defined and policed by those in power. The slippery slope towards tyranny is clear. This is not how free and democratic countries should function.

“True friends do not stand idly by as their friends blindly walk into a ditch. The robust protection of fundamental freedoms has historically formed the basis of the special relationship between the UK and the US—a relationship that’s now needlessly strained due, in large part, to the current censorial trajectory of Britain.

“It is right for the US State Department and JD Vance to warn the UK that censorship is antithetical to freedom, democracy, and societal flourishing.”

Mr Igunnubole added: “Good relations with the US are key for our economic and military security. Criminal prosecutions for silent prayer and offers of consensual conversation are not only illiberal, but also irresponsible.

“The government must act to ensure that what is undoubtedly our most important diplomatic relationship is not put at risk due to an ideological commitment to censorship.”

District Judge Austin, who will hand down Dr Tossici-Bolt’s verdict on Friday, is the same judge who last October found Adam Smith-Connor guilty for silently praying in a “buffer zone”, in a case which Vice President Vance directly mentioned in his Munich Security Conference Speech.

With ADF International’s support, Mr Smith-Connor will appeal his conviction in a July trial.

Rose Docherty’s “buffer zone” case in Scotland

This is not the first time DRL has commented on UK “buffer zone” censorship.

In February, DRL commented on the arrest of 73-year-old Christian grandmother Rose Docherty for holding a sign that read, “Coercion is a crime, here to talk, only if you want,” in a “buffer zone” in Glasgow.

DRL said: “Police in Scotland arrested a woman holding a sign offering to talk to people in a restricted ‘buffer zone.’ Freedom of expression needs to be protected.  We call on governments, whether in Scotland or around the world, to respect freedom of expression for all.”

ADF International is supporting Ms Docherty, who recently rejected a warning sent to her in a letter from the Procurator Fiscal, as it required her to accept her actions were unlawful.

She did not cause harassment, block access to an abortion facility or influence anyone regarding abortion—activities banned in Scotland’s “buffer zones”—but merely exercised her right to freedom of expression, which is protected in national and international law, by offering consensual conversations.

Ms Docherty explained: “I cannot pretend that what I did was unlawful—I merely offered a chat, particularly in the context of anyone experiencing coercion of any kind—an issue firmly on my heart.  

“This is why I will be rejecting the warning I was issued by Scottish authorities, with support from ADF International. It isn’t right to deprive anyone of the right to take up my offer to talk—or to restrict me unfairly from carrying out this peaceful, compassionate action.” 

Reacting to the letter sent by the Procurator Fiscal, Lorcán Price, Irish barrister and Legal Counsel for ADF International, said: “The warning issued by the Scottish authorities in effect demands Rose accept culpability for criminal behaviour. This Christian grandmother stood peacefully, alone, making herself available for a discussion with anyone who wished to speak to her. How can this possibly be outlawed in our society?” 

In his Munich Security Conference speech last month, Vice President JD Vance called out Scotland’s draconian abortion facility “buffer zones”.

The Scottish government last year sent a letter to residents whose houses were in a “buffer zone”, saying: “Activities in a private place (such as a house) within the area between the protected premises and the boundary of a Zone could be an offence if they can be seen or heard within the Zone and are done intentionally or recklessly.”

Green Party MSP Gillian Mackay, who authored the Scottish “buffer zone” law, admitted in an interview following Vice President Vance’s comments that in her view prayer in a private home within a “buffer zone” could be a crime depending “on who’s passing by the window”.

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Foreign Censorship on U.S. Social Media Platforms – Australian Case Validates Vance’s Concerns

  • Melbourne Tribunal to hear “monumental” free speech challenge from 31st March-4th April
  • Musk’s “X” and Canadian “Billboard Chris” bringing case against Australian “eSafety Commissioner” for censoring online post criticizing gender ideology
  • VP Vance, Secretary of State Rubio have raised repeated concerns about the impact of censorial foreign governments on American-based social media platforms

MELBOURNE (27 March 2025) – The Administrative Review Tribunal in Melbourne is set to hear a “monumental” free speech case next week, commencing March 31st, as concerns mount worldwide about online censorship.

Canadian internet sensation and children’s safety campaigner “Billboard Chris” (Chris Elston), alongside Elon Musk’s U.S.-based social media platform “X”, will challenge the Australian authorities’ decision to censor an online post criticizing gender ideology across Australia.

The case demonstrates the tangible reality of global censorship concerns raised repeatedly by Vice-President J.D. Vance, both at a Munich Security Conference in February and in a press conference with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

Speaking about free speech restrictions in the context of the UK, Vance said:

“We also know that there have been infringements on free speech that actually affect not just the British — of course what the British do in their own country is up to them — but also affect American technology companies and, by extension, American citizens.”

Speaking recently in Paris, Vance added that while “we want to ensure the internet is a safe place”, restrictions on online content should focus on protecting children from predatory abuse, rather than preventing “a grown man or woman from accessing an opinion that the government thinks is misinformation.”

The actions of the eSafety Commissioner demonstrate a concerning rise in censorship in the digital age – where bureaucracies can subjectively interpret which speech is deemed “offensive” or “wrong”, leading to the curtailment of free speech rights.

Robert Clarke, Director of Advocacy for ADF International, which is backing Elston’s legal defence, said:

“The decision of Australian authorities to prevent Australian citizens from hearing and evaluating information about gender ideology is a patronizing affront to the principles of democracy.

“The confidence of the Australian eSafety commissioner to censor citizens of Canada on an American platform, shows the truly global nature of the free speech crisis.

“Speaking up for free speech is critical at this juncture, and we’re proud to be backing Billboard Chris as he does just that.”

Chris Elston, a.k.a “Billboard Chris”, commented:

“My case is an example of the free speech crisis here in Australia and across the West. More and more, the public is waking up to the fact that puberty blockers are a form of child abuse. Gender ideology can only thrive under censorship – when we are deprived of shining a light on the madness.”

THE CASE: Freedom of online speech in the balance

On 28 February 2024, Elston took to “X” to share a Daily Mail article titled “Kinky secrets of UN trans expert REVEALED”.

The article, and accompanying tweet, criticised the appointment of Australian transgender activist Teddy Cook to a World Health Organization “panel of experts” set to advise on global transgender policy.

Cook complained about the post to Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, who requested that “X” remove the content. The social media platform owned by free speech advocate Elon Musk initially refused, but following a subsequent formal removal order from the Commissioner, later geo-blocked the content in Australia. X has since also filed an appeal against the order at the Administrative Review Tribunal in Melbourne.

Billboard Chris, with the support of ADF International and the Australian Human Rights Law Alliance, and alongside Elon Musk’s “X”, is appealing the violation of his right to peacefully share his convictions. 

The case will be heard in Melbourne for five days on the week beginning March 31st.

Members of the public are invited to support Chris’s legal case here. 

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

“Billboard Chris” fined, threatened with arrest in Brisbane days ahead of “ultimate” court challenge against government online censorship

  • Campaigner’s “X” post highlighting unsuitability of transgender activist serving on WHO “panel of experts” currently geo-blocked in Australia  
  • Musk’s “X” and Canadian “Billboard Chris” to bring case against Australian “eSafety Commissioner” over censored post, March 31st-April 4th
  • “Billboard Chris” forcibly moved while having street conversations in Brisbane days ahead of hearing

MELBOURNE (25 March 2025) – Canadian internet sensation and children’s safety campaigner “Billboard Chris” was threatened with arrest, fined 806 Australian Dollars (AUD), and forcibly moved in Brisbane today after conducting consensual conversations with members of the Australian public. 

Video footage shows Chris Elston, who has almost 500k followers on social media platform “X”, freely invite conversations with members of the public in an open area in Brisbane city center.  

The campaigner wore a sign saying “children cannot consent to puberty blockers” as a means of inviting open conversation and debate on this topic. 

Despite the video footage showing that the public could freely move around Elston and choose whether or not to engage in conversation, the Canadian dad of two was nevertheless accused of “obstructing people”, issued the fine, and forcibly removed from the area by police. 

The “litmus test” case for international free speech 

Chris Elston is currently in Australia for a legal free speech challenge which has been described as a “litmus test” for the international protection of the right to free speech against government censorship. 

On 28 February 2024, Elston took to “X” to share a Daily Mail article titled “Kinky secrets of UN trans expert REVEALED”. 

The article, and accompanying tweet, criticised the appointment of Australian transgender activist Teddy Cook to a World Health Organization “panel of experts” set to advise on global transgender policy.  

Cook complained about the post to Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, who requested that “X” remove the content. The social media platform owned by free speech advocate Elon Musk initially refused, but following a subsequent formal removal order from the Commissioner, later geo-blocked the content in Australia. X has since also filed an appeal against the order at the Administrative Review Tribunal in Melbourne.  

Billboard Chris, with the support of ADF International and the Australian Human Rights Law Alliance, and alongside Elon Musk’s “X”, is appealing the violation of his right to peacefully share his convictions.   

The case will be heard in Melbourne for five days on the week beginning March 31st.  

Members of the public are invited to support Chris’s legal case here: https://adfinternational.org/campaign/support-billboard-chris   

Chris Elston, a.k.a “Billboard Chris”, commented: 

“No child has ever been born in the wrong body. As a father, I have grave concerns about the impact of harmful gender ideology on our children’s wellbeing. This reality is being increasingly recognised around the world, with government after government ordering a review into the use of toxic puberty blockers. This is a serious issue with real world implications for families across the globe and we need to be able to discuss it.  

“Children struggling with distress regarding their sex deserve better than ‘guidelines’ written by activists who only want to push them in one direction.” 

Ahead of the court date, Robert Clarke, Director of Advocacy for ADF International, who is serving as part of Billboard Chris’s legal team, said:  

“This significant legal showdown with Australian authorities represents a litmus test for free speech in a world seeing increasing push back against global censorship.   

“We’re used to hearing about governments silencing or punishing citizens for their ‘wrong’ speech in parts of the world with strict blasphemy laws – but now, from Australia, to Mexico, to across the EU, we see Western governments increasingly take authoritarian steps to shut down views they don’t like, often by branding them as “offensive”, “hateful”, or “misinformation.”   

“In a free society, ideas should be challenged with ideas, not state censorship. For years, Chris has been speaking an important truth to which many in Australia are now waking up – children cannot consent to puberty blockers.   

We’re proud to stand with Billboard Chris in defending the right to live and speak the truth.” 

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

PICTURED: Chris Elston (x2); Robert Clarke (ADF International); Elston with the ADF International team supporting his legal defence

Buffer zone trial: Officers admit they did not “personally witness” any “harassment” before Christian woman fined for holding “here to talk” sign

  • Livia Tossici-Bolt’s trial continues TODAY at Poole Magistrates’ Court after the 63-year-old retiree held a sign in an abortion “buffer zone” reading “here to talk, if you want”
  • Rukan Taki, BCP Council Officer who attended the scene, confirms he did not personally witness Tossici-Bolt engage in harassment or intimidation

BOURNEMOUTH (6th March 2025) – The criminal trial of Livia Tossici-Bolt, the retired medical scientist who held a “here to talk, if you want” sign in an abortion “buffer zone”, began yesterday and will continue today. 

Tossici-Bolt, 63, is accused of breaching a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) which installs a “buffer zone” around a local abortion facility, prohibiting “harassment”, “intimidation”, and “engaging in an act of approval or disapproval, with respect to issues related to abortion services”.  

“There’s nothing wrong with two adults engaging in a consensual conversation on the street. I shouldn’t be treated like a criminal just for this.”

- Livia Tossici-Bolt

Tossici-Bolt took the witness stand on Wednesday afternoon, explaining her motivation to hold a sign offering conversation following a period in lockdown where social interaction had been minimal.  

She referenced trends at the time of people offering “free hugs” and other sources of interaction on the street.  

Tossici-Bolt, who is an Italian mother, told the court she had positive interactions with various groups of people while holding the sign, who engaged with her about various issues they were facing in their lives – including from students who spoke to her about their studies, and parents who spoke about their children. After one interaction, Livia recalled, she was even invited to join an individual for a cup of tea at their house. 

Speaking ahead of her trial, Tossici-Bolt said, “There’s nothing wrong with two adults engaging in a consensual conversation on the street. I shouldn’t be treated like a criminal just for this.” 

Tossici-Bolt’s legal defence is being supported by ADF International. 

Officers attending the scene did not "personally witness" any harassment

Taking the witness stand on Wednesday morning, Officer Rukan Taki, who is employed by Bournemouth, Christchurch & Poole Council and attended the incident leading to Tossici-Bolt’s fine, conceded that despite his belief that Tossici-Bolt’s behaviour constituted a breach of the PSPO, he did not actually “personally witness” her engage in harassment or intimidation. 

Taki said he “absolutely” accepted that conversations could be held within the PSPO “buffer zone” which don’t amount to harassment or intimidation – a point confirmed by two further officers who took the witness stand in the afternoon. He also confirmed that being “open to speaking to someone” also did not amount to harassment or intimidation. 

Later in the afternoon, Officer Francesca Alice Ozanne clarified that while she witnessed Livia Tossici-Bolt in the “buffer zone”, she did not actually see any people enter or leave the clinic – thus leaving doubt as to whether Tossici-Bolt could be believed to be engaging in “harassment” of any service users. 

Ozanne, Taki and further witnesses from the council further stated that they had no recollection of any reports being made from members of the public that they had been victims of harassment due to Tossici-Bolt’s presence.

Jeremiah Igunnubole, legal counsel for ADF International, supporting Livia’s defence, said: 

“Under far-reaching and vaguely-written rules, we have seen volunteers like Livia criminalised simply for offering to engage in consensual conversation; and others dragged through courts for praying, even silently, in their minds.

The principle of freedom of thought and speech must be defended both within and outside “buffer zones”. It’s unthinkable that as real crime is mounting, policing time and resources are being expended on peaceful individuals like Livia who simply, and peacefully, offer to speak. What kind of society does that?” 

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only.

PICTURED: Livia Tossici-Bolt; ADF UK Legal Counsel Jeremiah Igunnubole

TODAY: Dorset retiree to face trial for offering a conversation in abortion “buffer zone”

  • Livia Tossici-Bolt held a sign reading “Here to talk, if you want” near an abortion facility in Bournemouth
  • Retired medical scientist to face trial 5th -6th MARCH; ADF UK supports legal defence
  • U.S. Vice-President J.D. Vance raises repeated concerns about the UK’s “buffer zone” laws – “these ideas are going to destroy Western civilisation”

BOURNEMOUTH (5 March 2025) – A retired medical scientist from Bournemouth will face trial on 5th-6th March following charges relating to her charitable work supporting women in crisis pregnancies.  

Livia Tossici-Bolt, 63, held a sign reading “here to talk, if you want to” near an abortion facility in Bournemouth. Several individuals approached her to take up her offer of a conversation about matters going on in their lives. 

“There’s nothing wrong with two adults engaging in a consensual conversation on the street. I shouldn’t be treated like a criminal just for this.”

- Livia Tossici-Bolt

Local authorities confronted Tossici-Bolt, alleging that she had breached a local abortion “buffer zone”, which bans “expression of approval or disapproval of abortion”. They issued a Fixed Penalty Notice, which Tossici-Bolt refused to pay, on the grounds that she did not breach the terms of the PSPO, and had the right, protected under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act, to offer consensual conversations. 

Tossici-Bolt will face trial at Bournemouth Magistrates’ Court on 5th-6th March 2025. ADF UK are supporting her legal defence. 

“There’s nothing wrong with two adults engaging in a consensual conversation on the street. I shouldn’t be treated like a criminal just for this,” said Livia Tossici-Bolt, whose legal defence is being supported by ADF UK.

International concerns over Britain's censorship

Speaking to Sean Hannity on Fox, U.S. Vice-President J.D. Vance yesterday listed the UK’s notorious “buffer zone” rules as an example of an idea which could “destroy Western civilisation.“

Referencing egregious examples of authoritarian censorship across Europe last month at the Munich security conference, Vance highlighted the “most concerning” case of Adam Smith-Connor – the army veteran and father of two in Britain who was convicted in November 2024 for praying silently, for a few minutes, on a public space across the road from the Bournemouth abortion facility, where a “buffer zone” was enforced.  

Reflecting on his concerns for Europe, the Vice-President said:  

“…perhaps most concerning, I look to our very dear friends, the United Kingdom, where the backslide away from conscience rights has placed the basic liberties of religious Britons, in particular in the crosshairs.  

“A little over two years ago, the British government charged Adam Smith Connor, a 51 year old physiotherapist and an Army veteran, with the heinous crime of standing 50m from an abortion clinic and silently praying for three minutes, not obstructing anyone, not interacting with anyone, just silently praying on his own.” 

Speaking on GB News Podcast “Choppers Politics” this month, Michael Gove said: “It is wrong to say that someone cannot pray – silently – because you have a particular view on abortion…For me, free speech is as close to a fundamental principle as any. And so is freedom of worship.” 

Jeremiah Igunnubole, Legal Counsel for ADF International, supporting Livia’s defence, said: 

“Under far-reaching and vaguely-written rules, we have seen volunteers like Livia criminalised simply for offering to talk; and others dragged through courts for praying, even silently, in their minds.   

The principle of freedom of thought and speech must be defended both within and outside “buffer zones”. It’s unthinkable that as real crime is mounting, policing time and resources are being expended on peaceful individuals like Livia who simply, and peacefully, offer to engage in consensual conversation. What kind of society does that?” commented Jeremiah Igunnubole, legal counsel for ADF UK, who are supporting Tossici-Bolt’s legal defence.

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only.

PICTURED: Livia Tossici-Bolt; ADF UK Legal Counsel Jeremiah Igunnubole

The Finnish Line: The Supreme Case of Päivi Räsänen After 6 Years

Päivi Räsänen’s case has been ongoing for 6 years. Now her fate rests at the Finnish Supreme Court

A Nation Watches as One of Its Most Respected Leaders Goes to the Supreme Court for Speaking Her Faith

Päivi Räsänen’s case has been ongoing for 6 years. Now her fate rests at the Finnish Supreme Court
Update Sept. 2025: The Finnish Supreme Court has set the date for an oral hearing on 30th October 2025.

The case of Finnish MP Päivi Räsänen is more than a legal battle; it’s a test of Europe’s commitment to democratic values.

As one of Finland’s most respected politicians, Päivi now faces the Finnish Supreme Court for peacefully expressing her Christian beliefs online.

Her story is a powerful reminder of what it means to be a Christian in today’s pervasive culture of censorship. It also demonstrates unwavering faith in the face of prosecution and punishment for so-called “hate speech”.

ADF International is proud to stand alongside Päivi as her legal ordeal reaches its 6th year.

A Life of Conviction

Päivi was still a very young girl when her parents decided she could go to the church in their small village of Konnunsuo, just inside the Finnish border from Russia. It’s a region known for hundreds of beautiful lakes and one less beautiful prison, where Päivi’s father worked, tending the gardens. While he and his wife were not Christians, they respected the faith and didn’t feel it would do little Päivi any harm to learn a bit of the Bible.

Time would prove them both wrong and right about that, but as a child, Päivi was fascinated with the things she learned in those Sunday morning classes.

“It was very, very affecting and important for me,” she remembers, nearly six decades later. “I was about 5 or 6 years old, and I remember well, even at that age, those talks the teachers shared with us about Jesus.”

Biblical concepts like grace and sin, salvation and judgment, she says, “were so concrete. Even as a small child, you have to think about these issues. And I remember praying that I would have my sins forgiven, and that Jesus would come into my life.”

How seriously Päivi took her new conversion became clear shortly afterward, when the prison warden came riding along the road by her family’s house on his bicycle. She urgently waved for him to stop. He did, looking down into her big, earnest, little-girl eyes to ask what was wrong.

“Do you love Jesus?” she asked. “You can’t get to heaven if you do not know Him.”

Embarrassed, the warden looked around and saw Päivi’s mother, standing nearby. “You should take your baby out of that Sunday school today!” he yelled. “Before she loses her mind!”

If her mother was concerned about her husband’s boss’s opinion, she didn’t show it. Päivi stayed in Sunday school. But it was by no means the last time Päivi spoke up for her faith. Or drew sharp opposition for doing so.

The Start of Päivi’s Career

Although she went to the University of Helsinki to study medicine, Päivi spent at least as much time there sharing her faith. For five years, she led a student missionary group in weekly door-to-door visits around campus, drawing other young people into discussions about moral values and cheerfully engaging them with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

“It was an important time in my life,” she remembers, “an important schooling. Every week, I was discussing quite difficult issues with students from different backgrounds and areas of study. I had to think very thoroughly about how my faith stands — how the Bible stands — in the face of these difficult questions. I learned to discuss ideas. I learned to debate.”

Her extracurricular evangelism also changed her life in another way. Twice during those years, Päivi joined other Christian students from all over Finland on mission trips to London, led by a tall, smiling young man named Niilo Räsänen.

He and Päivi took a shine to each other, began to date, and soon were married. They went on to raise four daughters and a son, as Niilo became a pastor in the Evangelical Lutheran Church and head of one of the denomination’s seminaries.

Päivi, meanwhile, went into general practice medicine. She quickly developed a reputation as both an excellent doctor and a thoughtful, outspoken defender of life.

“I had decided already during my studies that I would not end the life of a child in the womb,” she says. In her spare time, she wrote books and pamphlets on the subject. That led to television and radio appearances, where she drew on those debate skills she’d honed back in college. Her strong, winsome arguments began to attract wide attention. People asked if she was interested in standing for office — perhaps campaigning for a seat in Parliament.

“At first I refused,” she says. “I thought it was not my place.” But people continued to urge her to run … and one of those urging was her husband.

“Actually, I think I was the first,” Niilo says. “But she wasn’t interested.” One day, though, he drove her through Helsinki, past the building where Parliament met. He pointed at the building. “Look at your future workplace,” he told her.

The 1990s brought a severe economic recession to Finland. Päivi’s patients were hit hard by what was happening and often poured out their worries to her.

“I could see a lot of problems in people’s lives,” she says — problems born of what was happening in her country’s politics and culture. “I thought I would like to try and influence the society and improve the welfare of the people. To not only give them medicine, but to try to heal the consequences of these problems.”

A person in Parliament could do that, she decided. The next time someone suggested she stand for office, Päivi was ready. “I answered, ‘Yes.’”

Päivi as a Parliamentarian

Päivi Räsänen has served continually in the Finnish Parliament since 1995. For 11 of those years, she acted as chairman of the Christian Democrats, a party she chose for its support of her Christian values and unswerving opposition to abortion. For four years, she also served as her nation’s minister of the interior, overseeing internal national security and migration issues.

Päivi reading her Bible at parliament

“I have felt, very deeply, that this has been my calling,” she says. “I’ve been happy to have the opportunity to influence our society, our country, and to try to make better living conditions for people, especially families and children and the elderly.

“In some ways, it is very similar to working as a doctor. People come to you to talk about their problems, and then you try to find some solution. That’s been my work in Parliament.” She’s learned, she says, that “politics is one way to show love to your neighbour.”

You might think that attitude would have enhanced Päivi’s interactions with Finland’s religious leaders — “church affairs” was another aspect of her responsibilities as minister of the interior, and her work brought her into contact with most of the prominent clerics of her country.

Still, even knowing these leaders so well, she was stunned to learn, in the summer of 2019, that the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland — her own denomination and the one in which her husband served as a pastor — had pledged its full support for an upcoming Helsinki Pride event.

“I knew that our church at that time was already quite divided,” Päivi says, “and there was a lot of progressive liberal thinking among our pastors.” Still, “that the whole church leadership had decided to support the event, publicly and financially, was a strong disappointment to me — and to many other Christians.”

Many friends confided to her their intention to resign from the church. Päivi seriously considered joining them. “I was praying, ‘What should I do now? Should I leave the church, too?’”

The Tweet That Sparked a Trial

But, on her knees, her Bible open before her, “I received a very clear vision,” Päivi says, “that now was not my time to jump out of this sinking boat — that I should try to wake people up. I was especially worried about our young people losing their trust in the Bible, with the leadership of the church teaching something so much against what the Bible teaches.”

“What the Bible teaches.” After a moment, she reached for her cell phone, turned to Romans 1:24-27, and snapped a photo. She pulled up her X (formerly Twitter) account, attached the picture, called it to the attention of the Evangelical Lutheran leadership, and added one simple question:

“How does the doctrine of the church, the Bible, fit together with the fact that shame and sin are raised as a matter of pride?”

She pressed “Tweet.”

And her life changed, forever.

Explain this word, 'sin', she was asked.

Päivi’s communique thoroughly rocked “the boat” and woke up everyone in it. Including Päivi.

A few weeks after she had posted the tweet, she opened a newspaper and read — to her astonishment — that local police had received a complaint about her message and were investigating. Their evidence would determine whether the nation’s chief prosecutor would bring her to trial for her beliefs.

“At first, I didn’t believe it,” Päivi says. “I thought, ‘No, no, this must be from a summer intern who doesn’t know what he’s saying.’” But a call to her local precinct confirmed that officers were indeed looking into the matter. When could she come in and speak with them?

Over the next few months, Päivi would be required to sit for a total of 13 hours of police interrogation.

“It was an absurd situation,” she remembers, “sitting there in a small room in the station, being interrogated about my Christian beliefs.” The policeman asking questions kept an open Bible on the table between them. He pointed at it as he probed her theology: “What is Romans about?” “Tell me about the first chapter.” “Walk me through Genesis.” “Explain this word, ‘sin.’”

Päivi found the whole thing almost laughable. “Just a few years before, I was the [cabinet] minister in charge of police, and now I was sitting here, being interrogated.” But the people of Finland understood what was happening: one of the most well-known political figures in their country was being detained at police headquarters for quoting Scripture to bishops.

“Someone joked on social media that maybe we were going to have Bible studies at the police station,” Päivi says, smiling. “But … these discussions were very good. I had the opportunity to [share with] that policeman very thoroughly the teachings of the Bible, from Genesis to the message of the Gospel … because he asked me to.

“Do you really want to hear this?” she asked him. “Because this has been such an important book to me. When I read it, I understand the message of the Gospel: that Jesus has died for my sins.”

“It was lovely,” she says, smiling, “telling that to the policeman.”

She left an impression. “If it were up to me,” he told her, after their last discussion, “you wouldn’t be sitting here. I hope we don’t have to meet like this again.”

Charged With “Hate Speech”

They didn’t. But Päivi had to wait more than a year to learn that the Finnish prosecutor general was formally charging her with three counts of “agitation against a minority group” — one, for publicly voicing her opinion on marriage and human sexuality in a 2004 pamphlet distributed at her church; two, for comments she made on the same topics on a 2019 radio show; and three, for the tweet directed at the leadership of her church.

Under Finland’s criminal code, “agitation against a minority group” falls under the section of “war crimes and crimes against humanity” punishable by tens of thousands of dollars in fines — and up to two years in prison.

Päivi knows better than most the penalty for breaking this particular law. After all, she was a member of the Finnish Parliament when it unanimously adopted these changes to the country’s criminal code 13 years ago.

“In Finland, as in all European countries, you have a law that prohibits so-called ‘hate speech,’” says Elyssa Koren, legal communications director for ADF International. Like most such laws, she says, this one carries with it the possibility of criminal charges. That’s not all the laws have in common.

These laws are often presented, Koren says, as a way “to reduce social tensions, to curb hostility, to foster conditions of peace. It’s a very reductive way of looking at societal problems … the idea that if you have less ‘hate speech,’ you’ll have less hate.” Unfortunately, she says, the laws are also “vaguely worded, overly broad, and don’t define ‘hate.’”

“‘Hate,’ really, is just in the eye of the beholder,” she says. “And what happens is what we’ve seen with this case: people are prosecuted for perfectly peaceful expression in the name of preventing ‘hate.’” When the law was passed in the Finnish Parliament, “nobody was much aware what the consequences would be. Päivi’s case is the litmus test for how the law will be applied to religious speech.”

Päivi says she sees now that she and her colleagues underestimated the implications of the law they all voted for. Many serving with her in the Finnish Parliament, she says, believe that “if I were to be convicted, then we would have to change the law.

“I’m not the only one in Finland who has spoken and taught about these issues,” she says. “There are thousands and thousands of similar writings. If my writings are banned, then [many] sermons and interviews and writings would be in danger. If I were convicted, it really would start a time of persecution among Christians.”

Which, unfortunately, seems to be the idea.

“‘Hate,’ really, is just in the eye of the beholder.”

Päivi Räsänen

Faith Under Fire

Päivi and her co-defendant — Bishop Juhana Pohjola, who is charged with publishing the 2004 pamphlet on marriage and sexuality Päivi shared with her church — were stunned when the prosecutor opened her case against them by showing Bible verses on a courtroom screen. Her ignorance of Christian theology was palpable, and she made no secret of her determination to see Päivi and Bishop Pohjola punished for views so contrary to contemporary secular morality.

“It’s become clear,” Koren says, “that they are not prosecuting Päivi Räsänen … they’re really prosecuting the Bible and Christian beliefs at a very high level. What’s at stake is the fundamental question of whether people — particularly people in the public eye — have the freedom to voice their Christian convictions in the public space.”

“What the prosecutor essentially is calling for,” says Paul Coleman, Executive Director of ADF International, “is the criminalization of the orthodox Christian position on fundamental Christian doctrine regarding marriage, sexuality, sin, and so forth. It’s shocking to see such brazen anti-Christian legal argumentation within a criminal context.”

Even more unsettling, Coleman says, is the fact that “there’s nothing unique about the situation in Finland. It doesn’t have worse law than anywhere else. It has a better legal system than most places. If this can happen in Finland, it can happen in any Western country.”

In fact, he says, “the same censorial sentiments exist in the U.S. — at all heights of power. On almost every college campus. In all of the major companies, particularly Big Tech. They exist in much of the U.S. political system and in the mindset of many law professors.

That line — between what we’re seeing take place in Finlans and what could very soon happen in the U.S. — is far smaller than most people realize. Or want to admit.”

A Ruling Due Before the Supreme Court

In March 2022, the Helsinki District Court unanimously acquitted Päivi and Bishop Pohjola of all charges, saying, “It is not for the district court to interpret biblical concepts.” A month later, the prosecutor appealed that ruling — something she is allowed to do under Finnish law. In November 2023, the Helsinki Court of Appeal confirmed the lower court’s acquittal.

The prosecutor then appealed both decisions to the Finnish Supreme Court, which has agreed to hear the case.

What the prosecution has secured, Koren says, “is another year or two during which Päivi is still under this pressure. Her reputation and her integrity as a civil servant are clouded by the fact that she continues to be criminally prosecuted for her peaceful expression.”

Still, Niilo says, “We don’t worry. Whatever happens, we will take it as God’s will and see what comes next.”

Paivi and Paul

“It’s remarkable,” Päivi says, “how God uses this.” From the beginning, she says, “I had a deep, deep feeling this was in God’s hands, that He was opening a door. There’ve been so many opportunities to testify about Jesus … before these courts, in front of police officers, even to those who vehemently disagree with me. It’s given me a lot of joy.

“I’ve received messages from people who’ve told me that, as they’ve followed the trials and listened to my interviews, they’ve started to read the Bible and pray. They’ve found Christ.

“I got a call from a 22-year-old man who told me that he knew almost nothing about Christianity but was listening to a radio interview where I said, ‘If you want to know Jesus, you can pray, He will come into your life.’ He has been a Christian now for over two years. Jesus came into his life.”

As a lawyer who feels called to defend freedom of religion and speech,” Coleman says, “it’s been the great privilege of my career to be [able] to support and defend Päivi. I’m not exaggerating by saying she is, ultimately, the reason why we exist.

“She’s tough. Really tough. Yet … always smiling, always kind. Over the past five years, I’ve sat through two trials with her, sat around her kitchen table, seen her in every context in between. She’s just such an unbelievably authentic person. The same in every context, whether being cross-examined for her faith, or hosting us for dinner after the hearing.”

During one hearing, Coleman says, “the prosecutor — who, bear in mind, has said horrible things about her and wants to put her in jail — was visibly unwell. And, at one of the breaks, Päivi just went over to sit with her, ask how she was doing, connect with her on a human level.

“She wasn’t doing it for the cameras,” he says. “No one saw it. But I thought, ‘What a remarkable person this is.’ It’s just such a privilege to be called as a ministry to stand alongside her and say, ‘We’ve got your back.’”

“I have received much more during this legal process than I have lost,” Päivi says. “When I was young, I read from those texts where Jesus says that, when they take you in front of courts and kings, you’ll be His witness, and He will provide what to say. I could never have believed I would ever be in this kind of situation. But I think it’s increased my trust in God.

“What I’ve found is that what God has promised, He is faithful [to do]. He really works as He has said. Jesus is alive, and He stands by His word. And He is good.”

Conclusion: The Assault on Freedom of Expression

At the heart of Päivi’s case is a growing trend across Europe: the weaponization of vague and subjective “hate speech” laws to suppress peaceful expression. The implications of this case extend far beyond Finland. What does this mean for ordinary European citizens if a respected parliamentarian can be prosecuted for a tweet?

International law, and that of Finland, guarantees freedom of speech and religion, yet cases like Päivi’s show how these rights are increasingly being violated or reinterpreted to serve ideological ends. If she were to be convicted, it would mark a dangerous shift towards state control over individual freedoms.

The principle at stake is not whether one agrees with Päivi’s beliefs. It’s whether a European democracy can still allow space for diverse opinions in the public square. Once the state decides which views are acceptable and which are not, the door opens to widespread censorship.

Europe’s commitment to democracy demands better. The Finnish Supreme Court now has a decision to make, and the world is watching. Time will tell, but one thing is certain: Päivi Räsänen will not be silenced.

ADF International is honoured to stand by her side, just as we’ve done for the last six years.

Scottish health authority suspend American midwifery student over pro-life Facebook posts

Picture: Marion McKinnon Photography
  • NHS Fife suspended placement of U.S. citizen and Edinburgh Napier midwifery student who raised objection to performing an abortion in Facebook comment  
  • Decision violates right of medical staff and students to free speech and conscientious objection, says ADF UK, providing legal support  
  • U.S. Vice-President Vance raises concerns to Keir Starmer in Washington about UK “infringements on freedom of speech” which affect American citizens 

DUNDEE (28 February 2025) - A midwifery student and mother of three resident in Scotland but from the USA was suspended from her training placement with NHS Fife over comments on a private Facebook forum explaining her conscientious objection to performing abortions.  

“It is concerning that an NHS health board would be reluctant to welcome a student who holds certain beliefs regarding the significance of unborn human life.”

- Sara Spencer, who was suspended for her pro-life Facebook comments

Sara Spencer, 30, was suspended and subjected to a fitness-to-practise investigation as a result of comments made on a private midwifery Facebook group in which she responded to a post asking: “Do midwives have anything to do with abortions, and can they refuse to take part in carrying them out because of their beliefs?” 

Commenting on her treatment, Sara Spencer said:   

“It’s well-known that medical professionals in the UK have a right to conscientiously object to performing an abortion.   

“As a student, I expected to be able to freely engage in discussion among my peers about the grounds for my conscientious objection, and to respectfully debate matters of medical law, ethics, and the philosophy of midwifery care – matters which lie at the heart of our profession. 

“I was shocked by NHS Fife’s response to my expression of legally protected beliefs. It is concerning that an NHS health board would be reluctant to welcome a student who holds certain beliefs regarding the significance of unborn human life.”  

Vance raises concerns over UK impinging on free speech of American citizens

During Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s visit to the White House yesterday, Vice President J.D. Vance highlighted concerns about “infringements on freedom of speech” in the UK, “…which also affect American technology companies and by extension, American citizens”. 

The Prime Minister responded, “we’ve had free speech for a very, very long time in the United Kingdom, and it will last for a very, very long time.”  

Keir Starmer assured U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance that “certainly we wouldn’t want to reach across U.S. citizens, and we don’t, and that’s absolutely right.” 

A right to engage in discussion 

Spencer contributed to a Facebook discussion by noting that there was “a right to refuse to take part [and the] law protects [individuals’] statutory right of conscientious objection” and that she would always personally object to participating in “killing” an unborn child.    

 As a result of complaints about her comments, Spencer was summoned to a meeting with her line manager at NHS Fife, who subsequently turned the matter over to Edinburgh Napier University, which initiated a Fitness to Practise investigation for a) bringing the profession or the University into disrepute b) conducting herself in a manner “detrimental to the safety, dignity, and wellbeing and personal and/or professional reputation of others” c) misusing social media and d) conducting herself in a manner falling below the expectations of the student’s relevant Professional Code. 

 Against the recommendation of the Fitness to Practise officer handling Spencer’s case, NHS Fife suspended Spencer’s placement for the duration of the investigation.  

 ”Sara’s career has been negatively impacted by a cultural prejudice against people with pro-life opinions – present both at her university, and in her workplace.   

 ”It’s clear that, while committed to a number of diversity policies, universities across the country have struggled to uphold true diversity of thought – punishing students who peacefully express their own ideas. Sara’s story points to a need for legislation which reaffirms freedom of speech in these learning environments, if the reputational standards of Scottish universities are to remain intact,” said Jeremiah Igunnubole, Legal Counsel for ADF UK, who supported Spencer.  

With legal support from ADF UK, Sara was subsequently cleared of all allegations, with the university finding “no case to answer”. NHS Fife strongly objected to this outcome, but changed its position following correspondence from the university.    

Freedom of conscience examined by ScotGov abortion law review

 “It should be considered entirely natural and expected that a midwife, focused on delivering life into the world, may have concerns about abortion. It’s for this reason that our laws protect freedom of conscience for all medical professionals, who should never be compelled to act in a way they consider harmful.  

 “The Scottish Government are currently undertaking a review of our nation’s abortion law, including with regard to conscientious objection, led by a panel of “experts” – many of whom have had a career within or around the abortion industry. Sara’s experience should sound an alarm bell about the need to reaffirm freedom of conscience across all public health boards,” commented Lois McLatchie Miller, Scottish Spokesperson for ADF UK.   

Despite being cleared of any wrongdoing, Spencer’s professors at Edinburgh Napier University have continued to issue warnings to her about her social media use, referring to Spencer’s comments regarding her pro-life beliefs as “inappropriate.” 

With support from ADF UK, Spencer is now seeking acknowledgement of the rights to both conscientious objection and freedom of expression of protected beliefs from NHS Fife, as well as assurances that they will not discriminate against those students and professionals who express pro-life views in the future.  

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

PICTURED: Sara Spencer (photo credit: Marion McKinnon Photography); Lois McLatchie Miller; Jeremiah Igunnubole

GOVE: “It is wrong to say that someone cannot pray silently” 

  • UK faces mounting backlash against silent prayer prosecutions as a result of abortion “buffer zones” 
  • J.D. Vance highlights “infringements on free speech” during Starmer’s trip to Washington

Rt. Hon. Michael Gove speaking to Chopper’s Political Podcast on GB News. Clip begins 29:52, full episode available here.

LONDON (28th February 2025) – Speaking to Christopher Hope on Chopper’s Politics Podcast, former justice secretary Michael Gove has condemned the prosecution of individuals simply for praying silently near abortion facilities in Great Britain. 

“It is wrong to say that someone cannot pray – silently – because you have a particular view on abortion... "

- Rt. Hon. Michael Gove

““It is wrong to say that someone cannot pray – silently – because you have a particular view on abortion…For me, free speech is as close to a fundamental principle as any. And so is freedom of worship,” commented Gove.

While the current Spectator Editor was clear that “genuine intimidation” was unacceptable, he expressed incredulity that prayer should be considered a crime in this context, adding “prayer…that’s at the foundation of the country…I’m not saying that everyone should believe, but you can’t understand Britain without understanding our Judeo-Christian tradition…” 

“Freedom of conscience and freedom of religion are fundamental freedoms,” he concluded. 

Jeremiah Igunnubole, Legal Counsel for ADF International, supporting the legal defense of Adam Smith-Connor and others prosecuted for praying inside “buffer zones”, responded:

“The policing of people’s very thoughts in “buffer zones” is the most extreme example of censorship across the West. While crime festers on the streets of England, it’s unbelievable that police time and resources are focused on criminalising peaceful Christians, who simply want to pray.

“Nobody can deny that two-tier policing is a problem here; nobody can deny that we are riding roughshod over freedom of speech and of thought. I thank Michael Gove, VP Vance and the many other voices who are issuing this wake-up call – we must restore basic standards of human rights.”

U.S. call out Britain for silent prayer crackdown

The comments surface as Keir Starmer concludes his meeting with U.S. President Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance, who in yesterday’s press conference referred to “infringements on free speech” taking place in the UK which the world leaders would “discuss at lunch”.

Earlier this month, J.D. Vance called out the UK’s censorial “buffer zones” at the Munich Security Conference. 

Listing egregious examples of authoritarian censorship across Europe, Vance highlighted the “most concerning” case of Adam Smith-Connor – the army veteran and father of two in Britain who was convicted in November 2024 for praying silently, for a few minutes, on a public space across the road from an abortion facility, where a “buffer zone” was enforced. 

Reflecting on his concerns for Europe, the Vice-President said: 

“…perhaps most concerning, I look to our very dear friends, the United Kingdom, where the backslide away from conscience rights has placed the basic liberties of religious Britons, in particular in the crosshairs. 

“A little over two years ago, the British government charged Adam Smith Connor, a 51 year old physiotherapist and an Army veteran, with the heinous crime of standing 50m from an abortion clinic and silently praying for three minutes, not obstructing anyone, not interacting with anyone, just silently praying on his own.” 

Prayer in Scottish Homes in Question

The Vice-President also raised concerns about a “buffer zone” law in Scotland which could even impact freedom to pray in one’s own home.  

This week, the architect of the law – Green Party MSP Gillian Mackay – conceded to the BBC that prayer with clasped hands could be a crime, “depending on who’s passing by the window”.  

The same MSP had accused J.D. Vance of spreading “misinformation” that private prayer in one’s home within 200m of an abortion facility could be a crime in Scotland. 

Gillian Mackay, interviewed on BBC “Scotcast” podcast this week. Full episode available on BBC iPlayer, clip begins 24.07

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Pictured: Adam Smith-Connor; Jeremiah Igunnubole, ADF International

U.S. Vice President Vance: “Concerning” British silent prayer conviction shows free speech is “in retreat”

  • U.S. President J.D. Vance has called out UK authorities for prosecuting an army veteran for his silent prayers near an abortion facility
  • Smith-Connor “overwhelmingly thankful” for support from the Vice President as he prepares to appeal his conviction in July, with support from ADF International 

MUNICH (14 February 2025) – “Free speech, I fear, is in retreat”, said U.S. Vice-President J.D. Vance in an address to world leaders at a security conference in Munich today. 

Listing egregious examples of authoritarian censorship across Europe, Vance highlighted the “most concerning” case of Adam Smith-Connor – the army veteran and father of two in Britain who was convicted in November 2024 for praying silently, for a few minutes, on a public space across the road from an abortion facility, where a “buffer zone” was enforced.

Reflecting on his concerns for Europe, the Vice-President said:

“…perhaps most concerning, I look to our very dear friends, the United Kingdom, where the backslide away from conscience rights has placed the basic liberties of religious Britons, in particular in the crosshairs.

“A little over two years ago, the British government charged Adam Smith Connor, a 51 year old physiotherapist and an Army veteran, with the heinous crime of standing 50m from an abortion clinic and silently praying for three minutes, not obstructing anyone, not interacting with anyone, just silently praying on his own.”

“I'm overwhelmingly thankful to Vice President Vance for raising my plight in front of world leaders.Nobody should be criminalised for their prayers, their mere thoughts."

- Adam Smith-Connor, convicted for praying silently in his head

In November 2022, Smith-Connor was confronted by officers who asked “what is the nature of your prayer?”, on a public green within a large “buffer zone” – an area covering several streets in the town – in which authorities have banned various expressions of pro-life or Christian belief, including through offering help to women in crisis pregnancies, or praying. 

Read the full text of the Public Spaces Protection Order here.

Adam was later charged, prosecuted, and convicted for his prayers at Poole Magistrates Court in October 2024. With support from ADF International, he is appealing his conviction.

The UK government has since nationalised “buffer zones”, banning “influence” within 150m of every abortion facility in the country.

 Upon hearing the words of the Vice President, Adam Smith-Connor said:

“I’m overwhelmingly thankful to Vice President Vance for raising my plight in front of world leaders. Nobody should be criminalised for their prayers, their mere thoughts – this case has exposed the UK authorities in front of the world as they allow “thought police” to prosecute peaceful, innocent people for what’s going on in their minds. 

“With support from ADF International, I will be appealing my ruling in July and hope for justice to be restored. Silent prayers are not a crime – not here, not anywhere.” 

Jeremiah Igunnubole, Legal Counsel for ADF International, supporting Adam’s legal defence, said:

“The policing of people’s very thoughts in “buffer zones” is the most extreme example of censorship across the West. While crime festers on the streets of England, it’s unbelievable that police time and resources are focused on criminalising peaceful Christians, who simply want to pray.

“Nobody can deny that two-tier policing is a problem here; nobody can deny that we are riding roughshod over freedom of speech and of thought. I thank VP Vance for issuing this wake-up call to our government –  we must restore basic standards of human rights.”

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Pictured: Adam Smith-Connor, Jeremiah Igunnubole

“Litmus Test” Court Case Against Government Censorship of Musk’s “X” to be Heard Next Month, Australia

Billboard Chris' case will be heard in Australia in March

  • As Australia prepares for a national puberty blocker review, a court battle ensues regarding censorship of voices opposed to gender ideology 

  • “X” post highlighting unsuitability of transgender activist serving on WHO “panel of experts” currently geo-blocked in Australia 

  • Musk’s “X” and Canadian internet star “Billboard Chris” to bring case against Australian “e-Safety Commissioner” over censored post, March 31st  

Billboard Chris' case will be heard in Australia in March

MELBOURNE (13 February 2025) – As Australia faces a significant review into the use of so-called “gender-affirming care” on children, including through the administration of toxic “puberty blockers”, the government is preparing to face court for censoring critics of gender ideology and its harm on children. 

Chris Elston, known as Billboard Chris, a Canadian father of two, took to “X” (formerly Twitter) on 28th February 2024 to share a Daily Mail article titled “Kinky secrets of a UN trans expert REVEALED”.

"This is a serious issue with real world implications, and we need to be able to discuss it."."

- Chris Elston (a.k.a. "Billboard Chris")

The article, and accompanying tweet, criticised the suitability of Australian transgender activist Teddy Cook to be appointed to a World Health Organization “panel of experts” set to advise on global transgender policy. 

Cook complained about the post to Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, who requested that “X” remove the content. The social media platform owned by free speech advocate Elon Musk initially refused, but following a subsequent formal removal order from the Commission, later geo-blocked the content in Australia. X has since also filed an appeal against the order at the Administrative Appeals Tribunal in Melbourne. 

Billboard Chris, with the support of ADF International and the Australian Human Rights Law Alliance, and alongside Elon Musk’s “X”, is appealing the violation of his right to peacefully share his convictions.  

The case will be heard in Melbourne on the week beginning March 31st. 

Members of the public are invited to join in supporting Chris’s legal case here: https://adfinternational.org/campaign/support-billboard-chris  

Chris Elston, a.k.a “Billboard Chris”, commented:

“No child has ever been born in the wrong body. As a father, I have grave concerns about the impact of harmful gender ideology on our children’s wellbeing. This reality is being increasingly recognised around the world, with government after government ordering a review into the use of toxic puberty blockers. This is a serious issue with real world implications for families across the globe and we need to be able to discuss it. 

“Children struggling with distress regarding their sex deserve better than ‘guidelines’ written by activists who only want to push them in one direction,” said Billboard Chris, engaging in a legal battle for free speech with support from ADF International. 

Ahead of the court date, Robert Clarke, Director of Advocacy for ADF International, who is serving as part of Billboard Chris’s legal team, said: 

“This significant legal showdown with Australian authorities represents a litmus test for free speech in a world seeing increasing push back against global censorship.  

“We’re used to hearing about governments silencing or punishing citizens for their ‘wrong’ speech in parts of the world with strict blasphemy laws – but now, from Australia, to Mexico, to across the EU, we see Western governments increasingly take authoritarian steps to shut down views they don’t like, often by branding them as “offensive”, “hateful”, or “misinformation.”  

“In a free society, ideas should be challenged with ideas, not state censorship. For years, Chris has been speaking an important truth to which many in Australia are now waking up – children cannot consent to puberty blockers.  

We’re proud to stand with Billboard Chris in defending the right to live and speak the truth.” 

You are currently viewing a placeholder content from YouTube. To access the actual content, click the button below. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.

More Information
Unblock content Accept required service and unblock content

Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only

Pictured: Chris Elston (“Billboard Chris”); Elston with the ADF International team supporting his legal defence; Robert Clarke, Director of Advocacy for ADF International