In April 2010, Carey submitted a witness statement to an appeal court considering the dismissal of a relationship counsellor who had refused to work with homosexuals, in which he suggested that intervention by senior clerics, including himself, was "indicative of a future civil unrest". In the same statement, he suggested that cases engaging religious rights should not be heard by any of the judges who had decided the previous cases, "as they have made clear their lack of knowledge about the Christian faith." His submission was rejected by the Court as "misplaced" and "deeply inimical to the public interest". Carey's position was widely criticised in the press. Andrew Brown, writing in "The Guardian", suggested that the effect of the judgment was to say that Carey was "a self-important and alarmist twit who has no idea what he is talking about". The "Church Times" commented that "One might be forgiven for thinking that Lord Carey of Clifton has generated more column-inches since retiring as Archbishop of Canterbury than he did when in office. His latest foray into the nation’s media is more than usually regrettable, as it strikes at the heart of the independence of the judiciary." However, his position was supported by his former colleague, the retired Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir Ali.