A recent High Court ruling has dismissed a defamation lawsuit brought by prominent Islamic influencer Mohammed Hijab against author and journalist Douglas Murray and The Spectator. The judgment, delivered on August 5, 2025, found that Murray's 2022 article, which accused Hijab of inflaming racial tensions during the Leicester riots, was "substantially true." Justice Johnson stated that Hijab "lied on significant issues" during the proceedings, rendering his evidence "worthless."
The legal battle stemmed from a September 2022 article by Murray in The Spectator, which described Hijab as a "street agitator" who "whipped up his followers" during the unrest between Muslim and Hindu communities in Leicester. Hijab, who has a large social media following, claimed the article caused significant reputational damage and financial losses. However, the court concluded that Hijab's own online videos were at least as damaging to his reputation as the article itself.
The tweet from Lachlan Phillips, which highlighted this ongoing legal dispute, also referenced another high-profile public debate: "Mr Tickle" trying to gain access to "Giggle for Girls." This refers to the legal challenge involving Roxanne Tickle, a transgender woman, and the "women-only" social networking app, Giggle for Girls, founded by Sall Grover.
In August 2024, the Federal Court of Australia found that Giggle for Girls had unlawfully discriminated against Roxanne Tickle by restricting her access to the app. Justice Robert Bromwich ruled that Tickle, who was assigned male at birth but identifies as female, was indirectly discriminated against. The court ordered Giggle for Girls to pay A$10,000 in damages and legal costs to Ms. Tickle.
Both Roxanne Tickle and Giggle for Girls CEO Sall Grover have since lodged appeals against this decision. Grover maintains that the ruling "misinterprets the fundamental rights of women and girls, and the principles of single-sex spaces essential for their safety and dignity." The ongoing appeals underscore the broader societal debate surrounding gender identity, discrimination, and the definition of single-sex spaces.
These two distinct but equally contentious public discussions, as encapsulated in the tweet, reflect current legal and social tensions surrounding identity, free speech, and community relations in contemporary society.