Key points​

• The “sovereign citizen” emerged in the United States in the early 1990s. Although this language is prominent in media reporting in Australia, there is ongoing debate about its relevance and accuracy. Increasingly the language of “pseudolaw adherent” is preferred because it is analytically clearer, focusing attention on the shared beliefs and tactics of adherents rather than a label. It also reduces false negatives because many people who use these arguments may deny that they are sovereign citizens.
  
• Pseudolaw adherents are individuals who believe ordinary laws do not apply to them. Built on a conspiratorial world view, adherents deploy their own interpretation of law to refuse to register their vehicles, obtain drivers licences, pay council rates, or recognise the authority of courts.
  
• The impact of pseudolaw adherents is broad and diffuse. Despite not recognising the authority of courts or government, they frequently file voluminous documents with state actors, waste resources, increase costs on themselves and others, and erode confidence in the administration of justice and governance.
  
• The risk of violence cannot be dismissed. While most adherents are not violent, the narrative that underlies the ideology holds that governments are illegitimate, seeking to enslave citizens. This ideology has led individuals into confrontation and violence.
  
• The scale of the challenge is unclear. There is little available data on the number of pseudolaw adherents or their interactions with state authorities in New South Wales or Australia. Nevertheless, the evidence that does exist suggests that the number of pseudolaw adherents grew significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic and numbers remain at an elevated level as compared to the situation pre-pandemic.
  
• The ideology developed in the United States, but its global spread has seen it latch onto other people and communities concerned about government. In Australia, we have seen sovereign citizen pseudolaw expressed by Indigenous peoples in native title proceedings, presented to mothers-to-be researching birthing options in inner west Sydney, and spread by people worried about COVID-19 era lockdowns and vaccine mandates.
  
• Pseudolaw is a commercial enterprise. Promoters and “gurus” make money selling false hope. It spreads because gurus adapt their scripts to different audiences.
  
• No court in the world has accepted a pseudolaw argument. However, repeated failure in court does not mean that pseudolaw offers nothing of value to those who adopt it. Pseudolaw can empower people who feel alienated from society and intimidated by legal processes.
  
• Most people turn to pseudolaw when they are facing a problem (such as a potential loss of licence, or council rates notice they cannot pay) and need a solution. But it grows because adherents do not trust that our political and legal institutions will work for them. Rebuilding social and institutional trust is key to combatting the ideology.