Supreme court ruling brings ‘clarity and confidence’, says government spokesperson
The supreme court ruling on the definition of a woman under the Equality Act brings “clarity and confidence, for women and service providers such as hospitals, refuges, and sports clubs”, a government spokesperson has said, reports the PA news agency.
Reacting to the supreme court ruling, a government spokesperson said:
We have always supported the protection of single-sex spaces based on biological sex.
This ruling brings clarity and confidence, for women and service providers such as hospitals, refuges, and sports clubs.
Single-sex spaces are protected in law and will always be protected by this government.
Key events
The Policy Exchange thinktank described today’s supreme court judgment as a “welcome victory” but insisted it should have been the government rather than a court which clarified the issue.
Lara Brown, senior research fellow on culture and identity at the thinktank, said:
By confirming that ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010 means ‘biological sex’, the supreme court has secured women’s sex-based rights – rights to which they have always been entitled as a matter of law.
While this is a welcome victory, it should never have been left to the courts to answer the question of ‘What is a woman?’
Had the government used their statutory powers to clarify that sex in the Equality Act 2010 means biological sex, when Policy Exchange called for them to do so in 2023, the Scottish ministers would never have been able to issue unlawful advice on the subject.
Scottish Greens call supreme court ruling ‘deeply concerning for human rights’
The Scottish Greens have described today’s supreme court ruling as “deeply concerning for human rights”. The party said it would “continue to stand with trans people and resist culture war being waged against them”.
On X, the Scottish Greens MSP Maggie Chapman wrote:
Sending love and solidarity to trans people everywhere.
We will always fight to protect human rights, dignity and respect for all people. We stand with the trans community today, tomorrow and always.
The UK supreme court decision is a “victory for women across the United Kingdom”, the leader of the Scottish Tories has said.
Russell Findlay hailed the decision, which confirmed that the definition of woman in the 2010 Equality Act refers to biological women, as an “abject humiliation for the SNP”.
Findlay said:
This is a victory for women across the United Kingdom, a victory for common sense – and an abject humiliation for the SNP.
John Swinney now needs to respect women’s rights and get rid of the dangerous gender policies which have become embedded in Scotland’s public institutions.
This ruling should sound the death knell once and for all for Nicola Sturgeon’s reckless self-ID plans, which Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Greens shamefully backed to the hilt at Holyrood.
John Swinney must stop obsessing about gender and get back to the day job of delivering better public services and a stronger economy.
The equalities watchdog for Great Britain welcomed the ruling as having addressed challenges around single-sex spaces.
Kishwer Falkner, chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), said:
Today the supreme court ruled that a gender recognition certificate does not change a person’s legal sex for the purposes of the Equality Act.
We are pleased that this judgment addresses several of the difficulties we highlighted in our submission to the court, including the challenges faced by those seeking to maintain single-sex spaces and the rights of same-sex attracted persons to form associations.
As we did not receive the judgment in advance, we will make a more detailed statement once we have had time to consider its implications in full.
Supreme court ruling brings ‘clarity and confidence’, says government spokesperson
The supreme court ruling on the definition of a woman under the Equality Act brings “clarity and confidence, for women and service providers such as hospitals, refuges, and sports clubs”, a government spokesperson has said, reports the PA news agency.
Reacting to the supreme court ruling, a government spokesperson said:
We have always supported the protection of single-sex spaces based on biological sex.
This ruling brings clarity and confidence, for women and service providers such as hospitals, refuges, and sports clubs.
Single-sex spaces are protected in law and will always be protected by this government.
The supreme court judgment in the For Women Scotland appeal against the Scottish government rules the certificated sex interpretation would have “rendered meaningless” a section of the 2010 Equalities Act dealing with protection from discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation.
This interpretation would mean “a trans woman (a biological male) with a GRC (gender recognition certificate)(so legally female) who remains sexually oriented to other females would become a same-sex attracted female, in other words, a lesbian” and would lead to an “inevitable loss of autonomy and dignity for lesbians” as well as affecting lesbian clubs and associations.
The judgment continues:
Read fairly, references to sex in this provision can only mean biological sex. People are not sexually oriented towards those in possession of a certificate.
Ruling does not diminish transgender women’s protections against direct discrimination, says supreme court
The ruling by the supreme court that “woman” in the Equality Act (EA) 2010 refers to biological women does not diminish transgender women’s protections against direct discrimination, the judges have said.
In their judgment, Lord Reed, Lord Hodge, Lady Rose and Lady Simler said:
A man who identifies as a woman who is treated less favourably because of the protected characteristic of gender reassignment will be able to claim on that basis.
A man who identifies as a woman who is treated less favourably not because of being trans (the protected characteristic of gender reassignment) but because of being perceived as being a woman will be able to claim for direct sex discrimination on that basis.
This does not entail any practical disadvantage and there is no discordance (as the Scottish ministers appear to suggest) between the individual’s position in society and the ability to claim on this basis.
A certificated sex reading of the EA 2010 is not necessary here, and the approach applies equally whether or not the claimant has a gender recognition certificate.
The LGB Alliance charity said the ruling “marks a watershed for women”.
According to the PA news agency, chief executive Kate Barker said:
The ruling confirms that the words ‘gay’ and ‘lesbian’ refer to same-sex sexual orientation and makes it absolutely clear that lesbians wishing to form associations of any size are lawfully entitled to exclude men – whether or not they possess a GRC (gender recognition certificate).
It is difficult to express the significance of this ruling: it marks a watershed for women and, in particular, lesbians who have seen their rights and identities steadily stolen from them over the last decade.
Barker said the supreme court ruling “delivers huge benefits to women and to lesbians”.
She told the PA news agency:
This is a victory for biology, for common sense, for reality.
It’s definitely a victory for lesbians as well, and it was specifically mentioned in the case how lesbians have been disadvantaged by this idea that maybe a man could be a woman and could be a lesbian if he had a certificate, and the ruling just absolutely blew that out of the water.
It was really fair, it was really clear and it delivers huge benefits to women and to lesbians in particular, so I’m absolutely we’re all thrilled about it.
Barker said the ruling would cut out a lot of expensive and time-consuming court cases in the future “because it sets a clear precedent”.
On the provision of single-sex services, the written supreme court judgment on the For Women Scotland appeal against the Scottish government gives examples including rape or domestic violence counselling, domestic violence refuges, rape crisis centres, female-only hospital wards and changing rooms.
It states:
Read fairly and in context, the provisions relating to single-sex services can only be interpreted by reference to biological sex.
It adds:
It is fanciful (even perverse) to think that any reasonable objection to the presence of a person of the opposite sex could be grounded in (gender recognition certificate) GRC status or that a confidential GRC could make any difference at all.
Kemi Badenoch calls supreme court ruling a ‘victory’
Kemi Badenoch has lauded as a “victory” the supreme court ruling that “woman” in equality law refers to biological women.
According to the PA news agency, the Conservative party leader said:
Saying ‘trans women are women’ was never true in fact, and now isn’t true in law either.
This is a victory for all of the women who faced personal abuse or lost their jobs for stating the obvious. Women are women and men are men: you cannot change your biological sex.
The era of Keir Starmer telling us women can have penises has come to an end.
Well done to For Women Scotland!
