Gender-critical campaigners sue SNP ministers for defying trans ruling
For Women Scotland said it had 'little choice but to initiate further legal action' after the Scottish Government failed to issue updated policies on access to female-only safe spaces.
Formal proceedings have started in the effort to quash guidance for schools that states pupils should be able to use the lavatories and changing facilities they 'feel most comfortable with'.
It also allows biological boys to compete against girls in school sports if they say they identify as female, The Sunday Times reported.
In addition, the campaign group's legal action is targeting rules in Scottish prisons, which allow biologically male prisoners to be housed in women's jails in certain circumstances.
A trans woman can be imprisoned in a female jail if they have not hurt or threatened women or girls and there is no basis to suppose they pose an unacceptable risk.
For Women Scotland has now applied to the Court of Session in Edinburgh seeking to quash the policies, which it says are 'inconsistent with the UK Supreme Court judgment of April 16 2025'.
The Supreme Court ruled trans women are not women for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, with the definition based on biological sex.
Some public bodies, including the Scottish Parliament and Police Scotland, have issued updated guidance banning trans people from using single-sex toilets and changing rooms.
John Swinney, the First Minister, said the rest of the public sector should await guidance on implementing the ruling from the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) before acting.
But interim guidance has been issued by the equalities watchdog stating that access to single-sex facilities in workplaces and public services should be based on biological sex.
The EHRC has also told the Scottish Government it did not need to delay, noting that the law was already set out in the Supreme Court's 'very readable' ruling and this was 'effective immediately'.
For Women Scotland warned Joe Griffin, the SNP administration's most senior civil servant, in June that it reserved 'the right to take further action if the Scottish Government continues to fail to uphold the law'.
In a new statement, the group said: 'Nothing has persuaded the government to take action and both policies remain stubbornly in place, to the detriment of vulnerable women and girls, leaving us little choice but to initiate further legal action.
'The Scottish ministers have 21 days to respond to the summons. If the policies have not been withdrawn by then we will lodge the summons for calling, and the government will have to defend its policies in court.
'We are asking the court to issue a declarator that the school guidance and the prison guidance are unlawful and that they be reduced in whole. We are also asking that both policies are suspended in the meantime.'
A Scottish Government spokesman said: 'It would be inappropriate to comment on live court proceedings.'
The National Library of Scotland (NLS) has also been warned it faces legal action after removing a gender-critical book from a major exhibition commemorating its centenary.
Human rights charity Sex Matters has written to the NLS warning that it could face thousands of claims for excluding The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht from its Dear Library display.
Maya Forstater, the charity's chief executive, argued represented unlawful discrimination and harassment under the Equality Act 2010, which protects gender-critical beliefs.
It emerged last week that the book, a collection of essays by feminists including JK Rowling, who had fought against Nicola Sturgeon's gender self-ID laws, had been selected for the exhibition.
But Amina Shah, Scotland's national librarian and the NLS chief executive, decided to remove the book from the exhibition after coming under pressure from the library's LGBT+ staff network, who called it 'hate speech'.
The NLS said the book would still be available to read in the library. A spokesman said: 'We will examine the contents of the letter and will respond in due course.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
29 minutes ago
- The Independent
Labour needs to ‘pick things up' after ‘tough' first year in power, Khan says
Labour needs to 'really pick things up' after a 'tough' first year in government, Sir Sadiq Khan has insisted. The London Mayor said Labour supporters would be 'delusional' if they did not recognise the difficulties the party had had since winning power in July 2024. After taking Labour into power at Downing Street for the first time since 2010, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has seen his party's popularity slump in the polls, amid criticism over issues such as welfare reforms. 'It's been a tough first year,' Sir Sadiq conceded. Speaking at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe, he insisted that Labour supporters 'need to have the humility to recognise' that 'otherwise we are being delusional'. The London Mayor, who was one of the most powerful Labour politicians until Sir Keir became Prime Minister, added: 'Those people that say it has been a great first year… I think they are letting the party down. 'It hasn't been a great first year. There have been great things that have happened in this first year, around the rights for renters, around the rights for workers, around energy security, and I could go on. 'But as first years go, it has not been a great first year.' However, he said the 'good news' is his party has 'got another four years to make sure we turn this around'. The London Mayor – who is a Liverpool FC supporter – said if Labour was in a football match, they would be 'two-nil down' But continuing his analogy, he said that only 15 or 20 minutes of the match had gone, with minutes still to play and to 'win this game'. He said: 'It is really important now we really pick things up because I think we are two-nil down. 'But the great news is we have turned it round before, we have won games before where we're two nil down, we can do it again.' His comments came as he said that many people who backed the party last year had 'lent us their vote'. Sir Sadiq said: 'They didn't sprint toward Labour at the ballot box, they lent us their vote, gave us the benefit of the doubt.' After over a decade out of power at Westminster, he also said that the party had 'lost the memory of running things'. Sir Sadiq said: 'It has taken some time for the Labour Party, the Labour Government, to understand how the machinery of government works.' But he added: 'There are some really, really good people in the cabinet, there is a good back office team as well. So I have got confidence we will turn it round.' He added: 'With Keir and the team we've got in Number 10, and across Whitehall, Westminster, we've got a great team. 'They are not performing to the level I know they can perform at. I'm not being critical of them, I think they themselves would admit they can do much more. 'So I am hoping the next three, four years you will really see the best of this government.'
The Herald Scotland
29 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Mayor Khan says Sturgeon ‘knew her stuff' but says SNP have ‘hoarded power'
But with the SNP having been in government in Edinburgh since 2007, he accused them of having 'hoarded power', saying this had left many Scots feeling 'disillusioned with the Scottish Parliament'. Speaking at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe, Sir Sadiq said that both 'Cardiff and Edinburgh are as centralised as Whitehall'. He added: 'We've had the SNP in power for a long time in Scotland, and I think they have hoarded power.' But he said he was 'looking forward' to a change at next May's Holyrood elections, when he said the Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar would be 'elected as the first minister'. However, the Labour Mayor stressed his dealings with Ms Sturgeon during the Covid pandemic had been 'really good', adding 'she was a grown up'. Sir Sadiq continued: 'Nicola Sturgeon was on top of her brief, she knew her stuff, as did Mark Drakeford. 'She was always courteous to me, we would speak offline about some of the challenges with the government, whether it was Theresa May or Boris Johnson, and my dealings with her were very cordial.'
Telegraph
29 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Farage is not selling out, he is just preparing Reform for government
There's a whisper on t'internet that Nigel Farage has sold out. It's based on things he's said – ie 'it's impossible' to deport every illegal alien – or the dissenting views of individual Reformers. Vanessa Frake, his new justice adviser, recently opined that it's impractical to ban all trans women from all prisons, contra the position of Farage himself. Journalists said Reform must be divided; the Tories, that Reform has turned wet. 'Men belong in men's prisons,' wrote Rob Jenrick. 'End of.' In a sign of how far the Overton window has shifted, even Labour is now attacking Farage as soft on crime. Its latest ad says he 'wants to make it easier to share revenge porn online', as if Nigel had secreted a camera into Rupert Lowe's bedroom and uploaded the grim results on YouTube. What is going on? The fuss around Frake needs to be contextualised: she was speaking for herself, and there's nowt wrong with that. Reform is a start-up. The whole premise is to offer a platform to those who hate machine politics but still want to serve the public. Such people, completely new to this business, are going to be opinionated; they will speak their mind. Isn't that what we want? Voters complain that politicians are robotic, yet the minute one of them demonstrates free will, commentators leap on it as evidence of civil war. Moreover, pluralism of thought is inevitable in any organisation growing this fast. A year ago, Reform was a one-man band. Today it has around 230,000 members, 450 branches and over 850 councillors, with competitive elections under way to staff the board. Farage could've banked winning 10 councils and moved on: instead he has set them a task, chiefly to save money, and invited voters to judge the national party on how local officials, operating beyond his direct control, do. That's brave; a hostage to fortune. But it reflects Farage's personal transformation from spoiler vote to potential PM. If he's moderating his rhetoric, it's probably not just because it's necessary to win. I think that Farage believes he will win. This is a man of conscience on the cusp of power, being careful not to over-hype expectations of what a Reform government can actually achieve. Consider past mistakes. Rishi Sunak said 'stop the boats', and didn't. Keir Starmer said 'smash the gangs', and he still hasn't. The failure to deliver promises on immigration has done as much damage to the country as mass migration itself, fuelling perceptions of elite failure – or lies – and eroding faith in democracy. The Left assumes that when Farage says Britain is on the verge of 'social collapse', of disorder and riots, this is what he wants to happen, but the opposite is true. He means it as a warning. Instinctual conservatives like Farage abhor revolution, and it's precisely because he has long operated on the interzone between centre and radical Right that he knows the anger that's out there and the potential for violent upheaval. Hence a Reform government, far from being fascist, might be the last chance to do the things that quell nativist anger. Saving our system from itself is the historic role Farage played in the late 2000s, when the rise of Ukip drained support from the BNP, channelling it into the safer waters of euroscepticism. He is the last gasp of the 20th century, defending its liberality and patriotism, and has an old-fashioned reading of British identity rooted in history and constitutionalism, not race or religion. 'I haven't fought the change,' caused by immigration, he once said, 'provided it comes with integration.' I'm sure that to him, men like Zia Yusuf – Reform's former chairman, Muslim and stinking rich – exemplify a British Dream that stretches from the beaches of Dunkirk to Ibiza, the freedom not to be told what to do, the right to have a laugh. To populist critics, however, Yusuf is a suspicious character who kept dragging Reform back to an illusionary centre-ground – compromise and betrayal – and Nigel's tolerance of him epitomised a lack of intellectual rigour. Farage might be tougher than the establishment on immigration, they say, but he's out-of-date. Doesn't see how bad things have got, doesn't get the existential threat posed by Islam. Lowe has speculated that he was driven out of Reform, in part, because the leadership didn't want him talking about 'mass deportation'. Spying an opportunity, the Tories are triangulating against Reform, suggesting Farage has embraced full communism by seeking to expand child benefit or nationalise industries. Arguably this illustrates their own, very unconservative addiction to economic dogma. Farage has evolved with circumstances – this is an insecure age that demands more babies, more manufacturing – and out of loyalty to constituencies that have been loyal to him. In short: if Scunthorpe wants its steel protected, he'll do it. The alternative is to offer the working class a dry lecture on supply and demand and what the country cannot afford. A bitter pill given Westminster earmarked £7bn to relocate Afghan refugees to the UK. Indeed, the basic problem the Conservatives have with trying to attack Farage from the Right is that we can remember what they did in office. Even if the Tories dumped Kemi and brought in Jenrick, who Farage has said will 'almost certainly' end up to the Right of him on immigration, Farage will turn to him at that first debate in 2029 and ask: 'Why did your party open the borders and refuse to leave the ECHR?' Jenrick has undergone a genuine conversion on these points, but my gut tells me the Tories are essentially a liberal party that occasionally says conservative things, whereas Reform is a conservative party that occasionally says liberal things. I am therefore more willing to give Reform the benefit of the doubt. The physical comparison between the slimline Jenrick and old Nigel, in a blazer, beneath a halo of cigarette smoke, would also be significant. Farage embodies his conservatism. So does Donald Trump. Trump, too, has said things at odds with his base – on abortion or war – and several Republicans ran against him from the Right in presidential primaries. They lost. Ultimately, politics is about vibes, and you are never going to convince the voters that Nigel Farage is a globalist cross-dressing as a nationalist.
