Democrats are coming out divided against the International Criminal Court (ICC) on Monday following a prosecutor’s decision to pursue arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas’ top leaders, with one lawmaker describing it as ‘retribution against Israel for the original sin of existing as a Jewish State.’ 

Rep. Richie Torres, D-N.Y., made the pointed remark as ICC prosecutor Karim Khan said his office has ‘reasonable grounds’ to believe Netanyahu, Israel Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, its top political leader Ismail Haniyeh and its military commander Mohammed Dief have committed ‘war crimes and crimes against humanity’ since the onset of the Israel-Hamas war on Oct. 7. 

‘Israel is not a member of the ICC and therefore the ICC has no jurisdiction. The decision to seek arrest warrants is not law but politics,’ Torres said in a statement. ‘It is not justice but rather retribution against Israel for the original sin of existing as a Jewish State and the subsequent sin of defending itself amid the deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust.  

‘Today’s decision in effect makes it criminal for a state like Israel to defend itself against an enemy shrewd enough to embed itself in a civilian population, as Hamas has done to an extent never seen before in the history of warfare,’ he continued. 

‘But for October 7th and Hamas’ unprecedented militarization of its own civilian population and infrastructure, there would be no war in Gaza and no humanitarian crisis among Gazans,’ Torres also said. ‘Hamas is the cause of everything tragic that has ensued and Hamas alone should be the target of criminal prosecution.’ 

Fellow New York Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who previously has said Israel is carrying out a ‘genocide’ in Gaza and has been implementing a ‘forced famine,’ said on Monday that ‘I think my role as much as possible broadly is … that we cease U.S. funding for human rights abuses, war crimes and violations abroad. 

‘And what we see happening in Gaza, in the West Bank and throughout Palestine has been a broad – and as we’ve seen even from this morning that with the ICC’s designation as well of both Sinwar and Netanyahu – that this is happening, and it’s occurring this should not happen with U.S. resources,’ she added. 

Fox News’ Tyler Olson contributed to this report. 

President Biden is condemning the International Criminal Court’s (ICC’s) decision to pursue arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant as ‘outrageous.’

ICC prosecutor Karim Khan announced earlier Monday that his office has ‘reasonable grounds’ to believe Netanyahu, Gallant and Hamas leaders have committed ‘war crimes and crimes against humanity’ since the onset of the Israel-Hamas war on Oct. 7. 

‘The ICC prosecutor’s application for arrest warrants against Israeli leaders is outrageous,’ Biden said in a statement issued Monday afternoon.

‘And let me be clear: whatever this prosecutor might imply, there is no equivalence – none – between Israel and Hamas,’ Biden added. ‘We will always stand with Israel against threats to its security,’ the president continued.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken also took aim at the ICC’s announcement, saying in a separate statement Monday that the State Department rejects the ‘[p]rosecutor’s equivalence of Israel with Hamas,’ calling it ‘shameful.’

‘The United States has been clear since well before the current conflict that that ICC has no jurisdiction over this matter. The ICC was established by its state parties as a court of limited jurisdiction. Those limits are rooted in principles of complementarity, which do not appear to have been applied here amid the Prosecutor’s rush to seek these arrest warrants rather than allowing the Israeli legal system a full and timely opportunity to proceed,’ Blinken argued. 

Blinken noted that in other matters, ‘the Prosecutor deferred to national investigations and worked with states to allow them time to investigate’ and ‘did not afford the same opportunity to Israel, which has ongoing investigations into allegations against its personnel.’

‘There are also deeply troubling process questions. Despite not being a member of the court, Israel was prepared to cooperate with the Prosecutor. In fact, the Prosecutor himself was scheduled to visit Israel as early as next week to discuss the investigation and hear from the Israeli Government,’ Blinken continued. ‘The Prosecutor’s staff was supposed to land in Israel today to coordinate the visit. Israel was informed that they did not board their flight around the same time that the Prosecutor went on cable television to announce the charges. These and other circumstances call into question the legitimacy and credibility of this investigation.’ 

The decision also ‘does nothing to help, and could jeopardize, ongoing efforts to reach a ceasefire agreement that would get hostages out and surge humanitarian assistance in, which are the goals the United States continues to pursue relentlessly,’ Blinken said.

A top House Republican leader is accusing the International Criminal Court (ICC) of equating Israel’s democratically elected government with terror group Hamas after its chief prosecutor petitioned for arrest warrants against top officials in both.

‘The ICC’s decision to equate Israel with Hamas as a war criminal is a gift to terrorists around the globe and a slap in the face to the only free-standing democracy in the Middle East,’ House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., the No. 3 House GOP lawmaker, told Fox News Digital. ‘There is no comparison between the deliberate killing, raping, and torturing of thousands of innocent civilians and those who are rightfully defending themselves against it.’

He’s one of several pro-Israel lawmakers who have called for the ICC to face consequences over the developments. Others are calling for the U.S. to take action directly against the international judicial body.

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said in a statement, ‘In the absence of leadership from the White House, Congress is reviewing all options, including sanctions, to punish the ICC and ensure its leadership faces consequences if they proceed. If the ICC is allowed to threaten Israeli leaders, ours could be next.’

ICC prosecutor Karim Khan announced on Monday morning that he believes there are ‘reasonable grounds’ to accuse Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant of ‘war crimes and crimes against humanity’ in the Gaza strip.

Among the charges Khan listed are the intentional targeting of civilians and ‘starvation of civilians as a method of warfare.’ 

He’s also seeking arrest warrants for Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, top Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh, and Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri, the head of Hamas’s military wing – known as the Al-Qassam Brigades – over the Palestinian liberation group’s Oct. 7, 2023, terror attack in Israel.

It’s prompted a flurry of outrage from Israel’s defenders in Washington, many of whom pointed out that Israel, like the U.S., is not under ICC jurisdiction. The Palestinian territories of Gaza and the West Bank, however, joined in 2015.

Emmer went a step further in his condemnation on Monday, declaring, ‘It’s time for the rest of the world to defund and refuse to recognize any legitimacy from a pro-terrorist international court.’

Meanwhile, Rep. Mike Waltz, R-Fla., suggested ICC officials should be banned from setting foot in the U.S. 

‘There is no legal or legislative basis for these charges,’ he told Fox News Digital, vowing that Congressional Republicans ‘will push to end American support for the ICC and bar their officials from entering our country.’

Rep. Jim Banks, R-Ind., urged President Biden to stand up against the Israel arrest warrants.

‘The ICC is a sham kangaroo court that’s drawing a moral equivalency between our ally Israel and the Hamas terrorists who are currently holding U.S. citizens hostage. This is why I co-sponsored legislation to sanction the ICC if it goes after Americans and our allies,’ he told Fox News Digital.

House GOP Conference Chair Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., who was in Israel meeting with Netanyahu when the news first broke Monday, is also urging Congress to mount a legislative response.

She said her bill would ‘punish those in the ICC that made this baseless, undemocratic decision.’

On the other side of Capitol Hill, pro-Israel hawks in the Senate are equally furious.

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said the charges against Netanyahu and Gallant are ‘politically motivated’ and warned, ‘My colleagues and I look forward to making sure neither Khan, his associates nor their families will ever set foot again in the United States.’

The top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, said in a statement, ‘Today’s actions have hurt the credibility of the court and seriously harmed legitimate accountability efforts where true war crimes are occurring, like Ukraine, Syria, and across Africa.’

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., accused Khan of lying about his intentions. He said in a statement, ‘Prosecutor Khan’s team was supposed to be in Israel today to arrange a meeting for next week with the prosecutor’s office about the allegations. I was told by ICC staff that the investigation would likely take months and not weeks, and that there would be meaningful consultation with the State of Israel. Instead of the ICC following through with scheduled consultations with Israel, they announced the warrants.’

Even Democrats up to the White House condemned the move – President Biden slammed the ICC’s warrants against Israel as ‘outrageous.’

Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., wrote on X, formerly Twitter: ‘Requesting arrest warrants for both Israel and Hamas leaders suggests there is a moral equivalence between them – there is none and it’s disgusting to suggest otherwise. The ICC’s credibility is now in shambles and they have only themselves to thank.’                

Amal Clooney, wife of actor George Clooney, was among the experts who advised the International Criminal Court (ICC) in seeking arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar over alleged war crimes. 

The ICC’s chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, asked Clooney, 46, to assist him with evaluating evidence of suspected war crimes and crimes against humanity in Israel and the Gaza Strip, where Israeli military forces have been operating since the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas.

‘I agreed and joined a panel of international legal experts to undertake this task,’ Clooney, an attorney, said in a lengthy statement on the Clooney Foundation for Justice website. 

 The ICC determined it has jurisdiction over crimes committed by Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, its top political leader Ismail Haniyeh and its military commander Mohammed Deif, as well as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

‘We unanimously conclude that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed Deif and Ismail Haniyeh have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity, including hostage-taking, murder and crimes of sexual violence,’ Clooney wrote of the panel’s determination.

She cited Israeli war crimes of ‘starvation as a method of warfare, murder, persecution and extermination.’

‘As a human rights lawyer, I will never accept that one child’s life has less value than another’s. I do not accept that any conflict should be beyond the reach of the law, nor that any perpetrator should be above the law,’ she wrote.

‘So I support the historic step that the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court has taken to bring justice to victims of atrocities in Israel and Palestine,’ Clooney added. 

Clooney is married to actor George Clooney, who is a well-known supporter of President Biden. The Biden campaign enlisted George Clooney, as well as actress Julia Roberts and former President Obama for a star-studded fundraiser in Los Angeles next month. 

George Clooney will appear in social media posts and digital ads in support of President Biden.

Amal Clooney was joined on the panel by legal experts in international humanitarian and criminal law. Two members are former judges at criminal tribunals at The Hauge. 

Meanwhile, Netanyahu called the ICC’s decision the latest example of ‘what the new antisemitism looks like.’ 

‘It is directed against the IDF soldiers, who are fighting with extraordinary heroism against the vile Hamas murderers who attacked us with terrible cruelty on Oct. 7,’ Netanyahu said in an English-language statement.

‘What a travesty of justice! What a disgrace!’ he said. 

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene responded to Rep. Jasmine Crockett on Monday for seeking to profit off her dust-up with the Georgia Republican during a chaotic House hearing last week.

Crockett’s campaign filed a trademark application on Sunday for the phrase ‘bleach blonde bad built butch body,’ to be used for hats, hoodies, socks, and t-shirts, among other things, according to a document viewed by Fox News Digital.

‘I’m very happy with myself. I turn 50 on Monday, and I’m so excited that I’m still alive and healthy and have done so much in life. And I think no matter what shape, size or how we look, we need to be ourselves, not telling women the only way to be attractive or accepted is to have fake boobs, fake hair, fake lashes, and injected faces,’ Greene told Fox News Digital. ‘I mean, we all wear makeup and do lashes and stuff sometimes, but it’s out of control. Women need a better message for women.’

Tensions ran high at last week’s late night House Oversight Committee meeting to advance a contempt of Congress resolution against Attorney General Merrick Garland.

At one point, Crockett criticized Greene’s line of inquiry to fellow Democrats on the committee, to which Greene responded, ‘I think your fake eyelashes are messing up what you’re reading.’

It prompted a flurry of jeers from Crockett’s fellow Democrats, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., who forced the panel to vote on whether Greene could speak further. 

Just as Greene was recognized, Crockett asked Comer for clarification, ‘I’m just curious, just to better understand your ruling, if someone on this committee then starts talking about somebody’s bleach blonde bad built butch body, that would not be engaging in personalities, correct?’

A day later, Crockett announced ‘A Crockett Clapback Collection’ that would ‘feature various swag that includes random things I’ve said.’

‘The money will go to ensuring that we have a Democratic House!’ she wrote X, formerly Twitter, accompanied by a photo of a male model wearing a black shirt emblazoned with her remarks about Greene.

Greene appeared to indirectly respond with a video of herself on the platform lifting weights, lauding herself as ‘built and strong.’

Crockett, meanwhile, accused Greene of racism during a recent CNN interview. She mentioned Greene’s comment about her eyelashes.

A spokesperson for Greene said, ‘The only person who has made this about color is Jasmine Crockett when she attacked MTG’s hair.’

The spokesperson also pointed out that Crockett’s new fundraising venture comes after multiple Democrats accused House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., of fundraising off of that hearing and other committee proceedings.

At one point, Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the top Democrat on the committee, said in the hearing, ‘There is an ethics principle that no solicitation of a campaign or political contribution may be linked to an action taken or to be taken by a member or employee in his or her official capacity. That’s just a reminder to my side. I hope that nobody is linking specific actions that you’re taking on the Oversight Committee to campaign contributions or solicitations.’

The Greene spokesman accused Democrats of ‘pure hypocrisy.’

But Crockett’s office responded to Fox News Digital, ‘The condemnation of Comer’s email was not merely because it referred the Committee, but rather because the content within it that clearly violates ethics rules.’

‘In contrast, Rep. Crockett did not engage in an official act merely by saying these six words and one would be hard pressed to find how these six words could be found as one,’ Crockett’s office added.

Fox News Digital reached out to Raskin’s office to ask whether his comments extended to Crockett as well. Fox News Digital also reached out to Crockett’s campaign for a response to Greene.

A helicopter carrying Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi crashed in Iran’s East Azerbaijin province Sunday into a fog-shrouded forest. 

As multiple emergency crews instigated search-and-rescue operations, speculation mounted as to what would happen in the event of Raisi’s death, and what it would mean for Iran’s internal affairs.   

Fox News Digital spoke with Behnam Ben Taleblu, an expert on Iranian security at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD), to discuss the implications for Iran’s domestic politics. 

The helicopter crash, Taleblu noted, comes after years of growing protests in the streets against the regime, as well as plummeting participation in elections. 

‘Raisi was a symbol of the hard right shift of what’s left of the governing elite of the Islamic Republic of Iran,’ Taleblu said. ‘It represents kind of this second generation where, loyalty and zeal rather than capability and competence were key factors in his political ascension.’ 

Taleblu noted that Raisi has had blood on his hands for decades, having been involved in the mass execution of prisoners in the late 1980s.

Raisi, now 63, previously ran Iran’s judiciary. He ran unsuccessfully for president in 2017 against Hassan Rouhani, the relatively moderate cleric who as president reached Tehran’s 2015 nuclear deal with world powers.

In 2021, Raisi became president of Iran in an election that saw all of his potentially prominent opponents barred from running under Iran’s vetting system. He swept nearly 62% of the 28.9 million votes, the lowest turnout by percentage in the Islamic Republic’s history. Millions stayed home and others voided ballots.

While a powerful position on paper, Raisi has ‘no domestic organic social support base,’ Taleblu said. ‘He’s really a vehicle for the ultra hard-right consolidation in Iranian Islamic politics.’ 

Raisi has long been seen as a protégé to Iran’s supreme leader and a potential successor for his position within the country’s Shiite theocracy. But with Raisi potentially out of the way, Taleblu said, ‘the short list would have gotten even shorter.’ 

‘Another person on that shortlist, that would benefit significantly from this is Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s son, Mojtaba, who right now basically wields power without accountability. And many, allege that he is interested in becoming the next supreme leader, or that he may be jockeying to become the next Supreme leader as well,’ Taleblu said.

Iran ultimately is run by its 85-year-old supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. But as president, Raisi supported the country’s enrichment of uranium up to near-weapons-grade levels, as well as it hampering international inspectors as part of its confrontation with the West.

Raisi also supported attacking Israel in a massive assault in April that saw over 300 drones and missiles fired at the country in response to a suspected Israeli attack that killed Iranian generals at the country’s embassy compound in Damascus, Syria — itself a widening of a yearslong shadow war between the two countries.

He also supported the country’s security services as they cracked down on all dissent, including in the aftermath of the 2022 death of Mahsa Amini and the nationwide protests that followed.

The monthslong security crackdown killed more than 500 people and saw over 22,000 detained. In March, a United Nations investigative panel found that Iran was responsible for the ‘physical violence’ that led to Amini’s death after her arrest for not wearing a hijab, or headscarf, to the liking of authorities.

Lawyers for two IRS whistleblowers who informed Congress about the Hunter Biden criminal probe are seeking an inspector general investigation into Special Counsel David Weiss, alleging he ‘hid and twisted’ information – prompting more angst on Capitol Hill amid inquiries into Biden family conduct and alleged politicization of the Justice Department.

Empower Oversight, the legal group representing IRS special agents Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, allege that Weiss’ team – in a March 11 federal court filing – deliberately misled the public by suggesting an unnamed federal agency was investigating the two whistleblowers for misconduct. However, the vague reference to the ‘potential investigation(s)’ is a reference to a probe the whistleblowers sought, alleging the Justice Department and IRS were retaliating against them for their disclosures.

Shapley and Ziegler testified last year to Congress alleging political considerations led the Justice Department and the Internal Revenue Service to go soft on its probe of Hunter Biden’s finances. Now, they have taken fire from both the defense and prosecution, noted House Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer, R-Ky.

‘Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, the two brave IRS whistleblowers who made legally protected disclosures to Congress about misconduct within the Justice Department, have been attacked by Hunter Biden’s legal team,’ Comer told Fox News Digital.

‘Special Counsel Weiss has been part of this smear campaign as he misled the public that the IRS whistleblowers were under investigation when in fact they were not,’ Comer continued. ‘Ever since Special Counsel Weiss got caught trying to give Hunter Biden a sweetheart plea deal, he’s been trying to cover his tracks. There must be accountability for this misconduct.’

Empower Oversight wants two Justice Department agencies – the Office of Inspector General and the Office of Professional Responsibility – to investigate the conduct by Weiss’ office.

‘David Weiss has been retaliating against Gary Shapley ever since Shapley objected a year and a half ago to letting the statute of limitations lapse on 2014 felony tax charges against Hunter Biden,’ Tristan Leavitt, president of Empower Oversight, told Fox News Digital. ‘Weiss then learned from internal IRS communications that Shapley had been telling his IRS chain of command about Weiss’ office pulling punches in the Hunter Biden probe.’

In a letter this week, representatives for the two whistleblowers also asked the Office of Special Counsel – an independent whistleblower protection agency known as OSC, not to be confused with Weiss’s office – to clarify for the record that the two agents are not under investigation.

‘Weiss’ response is exactly why Shapley filed a whistleblower retaliation complaint with OSC in the first place,’ Leavitt continued. ‘DOJ OIG or OPR need to investigate to see whether Weiss’ office intentionally misled the public in order to further retaliate against the IRS whistleblowers.’

Reached by Fox News Digital, Weiss spokesperson Kim Reeves declined to comment for this story.

In 2023, Hunter Biden entered a plea deal with Delaware U.S. Attorney Weiss’ office. However, Shapley and Ziegler – who worked on the investigation – presented the House Ways and Means Committee and the House Oversight Committee with new information about the case. Shortly thereafter, a federal judge rejected the agreement.

After that, Attorney General Merrick Garland gave Weiss special counsel status, allowing him to bring charges outside his jurisdiction. Weiss secured an indictment on a gun charge in Delaware and a tax evasion case in California.  

In February, Hunter Biden’s lawyers filed a motion to dismiss the tax case in California, arguing in part that Shapley and Ziegler made disclosures that put political pressure on prosecutors.

The March 11 filing by Weiss’ office in federal court in the Central District of California was in opposition to the motion to dismiss the case, and attempted to rebut that claim about the influence of whistleblowers – though in doing so, suggested they were under investigation.

The Weiss response to the motion to dismiss said Shapley and Ziegler ‘made unsubstantiated claims that prosecutors’ decision-making in this investigation was infected by politics.’ It adds the ‘IRS has taken responsible steps to address Shapley and Ziegler’s conduct.’ It directs the court to Exhibit 2, redacted from the public.

The Weiss team explains redactions in Exhibit 2 are because, ‘Here, the potential investigation(s) may involve allegations of wrongdoing, and the potential investigation(s) could be frustrated, not served, if the public were allowed access to these materials in the midst of the potential investigation(s).’

On May 14, the advocates for the IRS whistleblowers wrote a letter to the Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz and Office of Professional Responsibility Counsel Jeffrey Ragsdale.

‘Weiss’ office hid and twisted the significance of OSC’s investigation into the whistleblowers’ own allegations that the IRS and Special Counsel Weiss retaliated against them,’ the letter to DOJ internal watchdog officials says. ‘Rather than acknowledging the truth that OSC is investigating the reprisal against the whistleblowers, the DOJ filing falsely suggested to the public that some unnamed agency was investigating the conduct of the whistleblowers themselves.’

The letter was signed by Leavitt, Empower Oversight founder Jason Foster, as well as attorneys Marke Lytle and Justin Gelfand.

The same day, the four signed a lengthier letter to the OSC acting principal deputy counsel, Karen Gorman. The letter notes the vague reference to investigations in Exhibit 2 was an OSC probe of the IRS and Justice Department initiated by Shapley and Ziegler. Whereas, the Weiss filing suggested the investigation is targeting Shapley and Ziegler.  

The letter to Gorman says the OSC should ‘not allow the Justice Department to mischaracterize your work for the purposes of a retaliatory attack on the reputation of whistleblowers who have done nothing wrong.’

An OSC spokesperson acknowledged receipt of the letter to Fox News Digital, but could not confirm or deny the existence of an open investigation.

The OSC has been under scrutiny for other reasons loosely related to the case involving President Biden’s son. The president appointed Hampton Dellinger, a former colleague of Hunter Biden at a law firm, to run the agency. Dellinger has recused himself from this case.

‘However, it would be entirely improper if the rest of OSC were to stay silent as the Biden Justice Department mischaracterizes OSC’s work probing the reprisal against the IRS whistleblowers in the Hunter Biden case,’ the letter to Gorman says. ‘Accordingly, we respectfully request that you correct the record as soon as possible.’

Courts in the United Kingdom are considering whether to nix mandatory wigs for barristers amid concerns the dress code requirement is ‘culturally insensitive.’ 

‘Following questions from barristers about wigs and hair discrimination, the Bar Council set up a working group to consider court dress in the context of all protected characteristics,’ a spokesperson for the Bar Council, which represents barristers in England and Wales, said in a statement to The Telegraph. ‘The findings of the working group are currently being discussed with the judiciary as part of our regular dialogue on equality and diversity matters.’

Several Black barristers have lodged complaints that the traditional headpieces discriminate against Afro-Caribbean hair. Though no permanent change has been decided, judges are reviewing proposals made by the Bar Council, and a decision is expected this fall at the earliest, the Telegraph reported. 

‘Senior judges are in active discussions with the Bar Council about the findings of their working group on court dress,’ a spokesperson for the judiciary also told the newspaper. ‘We welcome these discussions as part of our continuing joint work on diversity and inclusion in the legal profession.’

Michael Etienne, a Black barrister with an afro hairstyle, branded the compulsory wigs as hair discrimination, a form of racism, in 2022, sparking public debate after he was ordered to wear the headpiece or face disciplinary action. The wigs, traditionally made of horsehair, are not required in all courtrooms. They haven’t been compulsory in family, civil or Supreme Court cases since 2007.

Leslie Thomas KC, a Black legal professional in London, told the Telegraph he believes the required wigs to be a ‘ridiculous costume’ that represents a ‘culturally insensitive climate’ at the Bar.

‘The wigs certainly should go. There isn’t any place in a modern society for barristers to be wearing 17th-century fashion,’ Thomas told the newspaper, suggesting the judiciary do away with other ‘archaic’ court dress, as well, such as wing collars, bands and collarettes. 

He said a dress code that instead solely requires barristers to wear a black gown with smart business wear underneath ‘would bring the profession into the 21st century.’

Rachel Bale, a mixed-race barrister with curly afro hair, pointed to religious exemptions already in place for Sikhs who wear turbans and Muslims who wear headscarves, suggesting to The Telegraph that barristers should be able to opt out for cultural reasons. She argued that wigs are often ‘not fit for purpose’ for naturally Black hairstyles.

‘Something overlooked often in Black culture is that your hair is so inexplicably important and it is completely interwoven with your identity,’ she told the newspaper.