In a ruling that comes with steep legal and political ramifications, the British Supreme Court has declared that the legal definition of “woman” under the Equality Act 2010 refers strictly to biological sex, which excludes transgender women, even though they have gender recognition certificates (GRCs).
This five-bench unanimous ruling came from a case filed by the group “For Women Scotland” against the Scottish Government’s decision to include transgender women with GRCs in the public board quota for women.
The five justices ruled that allowing those with GRCs to be legally recognized as their acquired gender — would “cut across” the clear definitions of “man” and “woman” in the Act, creating “incoherent” and “heterogeneous groupings.”
The court’s deputy president, Justice Patrick Hodge wrote that the law must be understood based on “the biological characteristics that make an individual a man or a woman,” even though the Act does not explicitly use the word “biological.”
Based on this judgement, public institutions like hospitals, sports clubs, and women’s shelters can now lawfully exclude transgender women from women-only spaces. The ruling will further fuel the rising tensions across Western democracies in the wake of US President Donald Trump’s utterances on the intersection of sex, gender identity, and legal protections.
“Everyone knows what sex is, and you can’t change it,” said Susan Smith of For Women Scotland. “It’s common sense Hopefully this will now see us back to reality.”
Welcoming the decision, the British government said it will bring “clarity and confidence” for women and institutions managing single-sex spaces. The judgement also reaffirmed that single-sex spaces “are protected in law and will always be protected by this government.”
Author J.K. Rowling, a vocal supporter of For Women Scotland, celebrated the decision, saying she was “so proud” of the campaigners. Rowling has argued that recognising transgender women as female can dilute women’s rights and undermine sex-based protections.
As expected, the ruling has sent shockwaves through trans and human rights organisations across Britain.
According to The Guardian, Scottish Trans called the decision “shocking,” saying it reverses two decades of legal understanding and could “undermine dignity and safety” of trans people. Amnesty International UK expressed disappointment, warning of “potentially concerning consequences,” even though the court reaffirmed that trans people remain protected under the Equality Act’s provisions on gender reassignment.
Maggie Chapman, a Green Party MSP, said the decision was “deeply concerning” and a blow to “some of the most marginalised people in our society.”
Scotland’s First Minister, John Swinney, said his government accepted the ruling and would now “engage on the implications,” while reaffirming a commitment to protecting the rights of all.
While the judgment applies specifically to Scottish law on public board membership, its ramifications are likely to extend across UK policymaking, especially in areas such as healthcare, education, and law enforcement.
(With inputs from AP)
ALSO READ: Peru court jails ex-President, his wife for 15 years in Odebrecht bribery scandal
About The Author
