Australia’s New Hate Laws Have Passed, But LGBTQIA+ People Are Still Left Out
Federal parliament has passed the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026, with the bill passing in both Houses on 20 January 2026.
The government has put new teeth into federal hate and extremism laws, but the strongest new protections are still narrowly framed, and that gap matters for LGBTQIA+ people who keep dealing with targeted abuse.
Why the government moved so fast?
The bill package was introduced in the aftermath of the Bondi Beach terror attack on 14 December 2025, which the Attorney-General’s Department and major legal groups point to as the catalyst for the reforms.
What the new laws actually do.
The ABC’s breakdown of the final package says the changes include a new federal framework to list “hate groups”, stronger migration powers linked to hate conduct, higher penalties for some hate-related crimes, and new aggravated penalties aimed at leaders who advocate violence.
Here’s the part advocacy groups have been circling: the bill’s new “aggravated sentencing factor” is explicitly tied to crimes motivated by hatred for a group distinguished by race, or national or ethnic origin.
Same story with the hate-group listing regime. The ABC reports the law defines “hate groups” in terms of organisations that incite hatred or communal violence based on race or national or ethnic origin, and it hinges on advice from ASIO (the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation) before a group can be listed.
So if someone is targeted because they are gay, bi, trans, or gender diverse, the new “race-only” pieces do not automatically bite in the same way.
So what does that mean for LGBTQIA+ people?
Equality Australia has been blunt that LGBTQIA+ people were excluded from the aggravated sentencing provision and left without protection from a serious vilification law limited to race, describing the result as creating “tiers” of protection.
This is where the policy debate gets real-life quickly. When the law signals that one kind of hate is treated as more urgent than another, it shapes reporting, charging decisions, and how safe people feel showing up as themselves in public, online, and at work. That does not need hype to land. It is already familiar.
What about free speech and protest?
The reforms have also triggered a separate, loud argument about how the laws might be used around protest and political speech, especially because listing decisions involve intelligence advice and the regime can carry heavy penalties.
The ABC reports Greens leader Larissa Waters called the changes “chilling”, while the government has argued the laws are aimed at incitement and violence, not shutting down disagreement.
And it raises an uncomfortable question people will keep asking in the months ahead: who gets to decide what crosses the line, and how transparent will that process be?
