I received this information via email from The Good saucer publication, but did not come with a URL. The post describes a forthcoming article which takes a novel approach to the voice referendum. The point is that the Voice attempts to codify the Uluru Statement from the Heart (USFTH) “in full,” as PM Albo said. But that, arguably, is a religious document. Yet there is an immediate conflict with section 116 of the constitution, at least prima facie, as it may be argued that this is implicitly establishing a religion, or religious observance. I know the bush lawyers (people like me) will get excited who don’t read past the black letters of the text, but the matter would have to be considered against High Court precedence and case law, and probably there is a counter; that the Voice itself is not religious as such. I do not know, but it may be worth the lawyers on our side mounting a High Court challenge on the constitutionality right now to see if the voice can be blown out of the water. It is worth a try.