The pub­lic dis­play of Nazi sym­bols in sup­port of Nazi ide­ol­o­gy was for decades after World War II a rar­i­ty in Aus­tralia. Yet in recent years there has been a sus­tained pro­lif­er­a­tion of Nazi sym­bols and ges­tures in the pub­lic sphere includ­ing, but not lim­it­ed to, dis­plays online. The neg­a­tive impacts have includ­ed threats and men­ace con­veyed to com­mu­ni­ties who are tar­get­ed by Nazi hate-ide­ol­o­gy, and an under­min­ing of their sense of secu­ri­ty, and of social cohe­sion. Leg­is­la­tion to ban the pub­lic dis­play of Nazi sym­bols and ges­tures has been enact­ed in NSW and Vic­to­ria, and Bills are cur­rent­ly under con­sid­er­a­tion in Queens­land and Tas­ma­nia, in addi­tion to the cur­rent Fed­er­al Bill. They take dif­fer­ent forms and treat par­tic­u­lar issues dif­fer­ent­ly. Aus­tralia has strug­gled to come up with a best prac­tice mod­el law. In this sub­mis­sion we con­sid­er how to define “Nazi sym­bol”, “pub­lic act”, “Nazi ges­ture” and the men­tal ele­ment of the offence, as well as spe­cif­ic issues such as the con­sti­tu­tion­al head of pow­er, the dis­play of Nazi sym­bols via body tat­toos, the adver­tis­ing and sale of Nazi mem­o­ra­bil­ia, defences, police pow­ers and penal­ties. We also address the need for any leg­is­la­tion to be com­ple­ment­ed by appro­pri­ate mea­sures in school edu­ca­tion.