Criticism is growing over how the Minns government handles its review of New South Wales hate-speech laws. Multiple outlets report that the government has asked a judge to review the legislation, a process that critics say was effectively expected to reach a particular outcome. The articles argue that, rather than clarifying the purpose and scope of the review, the government’s approach raises questions about transparency and the reasons for keeping aspects of the process secret or limited. In both accounts, the central claim is that the government initiated the judicial review with sufficient foreknowledge of the likely conclusion, prompting calls for the findings to be fully explained and for greater openness about how the review is being conducted. The reports do not present competing technical legal findings in the provided text, but they do converge on the same framing: scrutiny focuses on the government’s secrecy surrounding the review and the implications for public trust. The issue is presented as one that has drawn wider public attention due to perceived lack of transparency in the process.