Maggie Chapman survives vote on key Holyrood committee role
It comes after the Green MSP told a protest, organised by trans rights activists in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling that sex is biological under the 2010 Equality Act, that the court's decision had been motivated by 'bigotry, prejudice, and hatred'.
READ MORE: Former health minister Susan Deacon joins Scotland Office
The comments sparked a backlash from Scotland's legal profession, with both the Law Society and the Faculty of Advocates speaking out against Chapman, who is deputy convener of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee.
The motion to remove Chapman – who attended Tuesday morning's meeting remotely – was lodged by Conservative MSP Tess White, who said her Green counterpart's comments had been "dangerous and incendiary" and that there "must be boundaries".
The Tory MSP pointed to Chapman's refusal to apologise for the remarks about the Supreme Court, saying she was "devoid of remorse".
Speaking in her own defence, Chapman said that rights for women and trans people were "going backwards" and pointed to analysis from the Good Law Project and others raising questions about whether the court's ruling met obligations under international human rights law.
Maggie Chapman spoke to the Holyrood committee remotely due to attending the STUC conference in Dundee (Image: Holyrood TV) The Green MSP argued that the ruling had happened amid a "culture war" in which trans people are demonised by politicians and parts of the media.
Though the Supreme Court has the right to issue a ruling, Chapman said, she did not have an obligation to agree with it, pointing to previous court rulings that went on to be condemned, such as the pardoned miners.
There are five members on the committee other than Chapman and White: SNP MSPs Karen Adam (who is the convener), Marie McNair, and Evelyn Tweed, Scottish Labour's Paul O'Kane, and Tory MSP Pam Gosal.
O'Kane told the committee that he wanted to give Chapman the opportunity to withdraw her remarks about the Supreme Court and unequivocally uphold the independence of the judiciary. If she would not take it, the Labour MSP said, he would vote to remove her from her role.
READ MORE: Senior Whitehall officials pushing for the Open to return to Donald Trump's Turnberry
McNair said she believed that Chapman had not been speaking at the protest in her role as deputy convener of the committee, did not think her comments were an issue for the committee, and so would not support the Tory motion to remove her.
Chapman spoke again and said she respected the rule of law and the judiciary, but stopped short of apologising for her comments on the Supreme Court. White then asked Chapman to show remorse for a final time, to which the Green MSP replied that she had said all she wished to.
The MSPs on the committee then voted by four to three to reject the motion. The SNP and Green MSPs voted as a bloc, as did the Tory and Labour MSPs.
A Scottish Parliament spokesperson previously explained the process: 'An MSP can be removed from sitting on a committee by agreement to a parliamentary motion.
'The motion would need to be lodged by the committee and a majority of members of the committee would need to agree on the need for this motion.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Glasgow Times
15 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Judge denies justice department request to unseal Epstein grand jury transcripts
The ruling on Wednesday by Judge Richard Berman in Manhattan came after the judge presiding over the case against British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's former girlfriend, also turned down the government's request. Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence after her conviction on sex trafficking charges for helping Epstein sexually abuse girls and young women. Ghislaine Maxwell (Chris Ison/PA) Epstein died in jail awaiting trial. A US justice department spokesperson declined to comment. Judge Berman said the information contained in the Epstein grand jury transcripts 'pales in comparison to the Epstein investigative information and materials in the hands of the Department of Justice.' According to his ruling, no victims gave evidence before the Epstein grand jury. The only witness, the judge wrote, was an FBI agent 'who had no direct knowledge of the facts of the case and whose testimony was mostly hearsay'. The agent gave evidence over two days, on June 18 and July 2 2019. The rest of the grand jury presentation consisted of a PowerPoint slideshow shown during the June 18 session and a call log shown during the July 2 session, which ended with grand jurors voting to indict Epstein. Both of those will also remain sealed, Judge Berman ruled. Maxwell's case has been the subject of heightened public focus since an outcry over the justice department's statement last month saying that it would not be releasing any additional documents from the Epstein sex trafficking investigation. The decision infuriated online sleuths, conspiracy theorists and elements of US President Donald Trump's base who had hoped to see proof of a government cover-up. Since then, Trump administration officials have tried to cast themselves as promoting transparency in the case, including by requesting from courts the unsealing of grand jury transcripts. 'The government is the logical party to make comprehensive disclosure to the public of the Epstein file,' Judge Berman wrote in an apparent reference to the justice department's refusal to release additional records on its own while simultaneously moving to unseal grand jury transcripts. 'By comparison,' he added, 'the instant grand jury motion appears to be a 'diversion' from the breadth and scope of the Epstein files in the government's possession. The grand jury testimony is merely a hearsay snippet of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged conduct.' Meanwhile, Maxwell was interviewed at a Florida courthouse weeks ago by US deputy attorney general Todd Blanche, and the house oversight committee had also said that it wanted to speak with Maxwell. Her lawyers said they would be open to an interview but only if the panel were to ensure immunity from prosecution. In a letter Maxwell's lawyers, representative James Comer, the committee chairman, wrote that the committee was willing to delay the deposition until after the resolution of Maxwell's appeal to the Supreme Court. That appeal is expected to be resolved in late September. Mr Comer wrote that while Maxwell's testimony was 'vital' to the Republican-led investigation into Epstein, the committee would not provide immunity or any questions in advance of her testimony, as was requested by her team.
Rhyl Journal
19 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
Judge denies justice department request to unseal Epstein grand jury transcripts
The ruling on Wednesday by Judge Richard Berman in Manhattan came after the judge presiding over the case against British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's former girlfriend, also turned down the government's request. Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence after her conviction on sex trafficking charges for helping Epstein sexually abuse girls and young women. Epstein died in jail awaiting trial. A US justice department spokesperson declined to comment. Judge Berman said the information contained in the Epstein grand jury transcripts 'pales in comparison to the Epstein investigative information and materials in the hands of the Department of Justice.' According to his ruling, no victims gave evidence before the Epstein grand jury. The only witness, the judge wrote, was an FBI agent 'who had no direct knowledge of the facts of the case and whose testimony was mostly hearsay'. The agent gave evidence over two days, on June 18 and July 2 2019. The rest of the grand jury presentation consisted of a PowerPoint slideshow shown during the June 18 session and a call log shown during the July 2 session, which ended with grand jurors voting to indict Epstein. Both of those will also remain sealed, Judge Berman ruled. Maxwell's case has been the subject of heightened public focus since an outcry over the justice department's statement last month saying that it would not be releasing any additional documents from the Epstein sex trafficking investigation. The decision infuriated online sleuths, conspiracy theorists and elements of US President Donald Trump's base who had hoped to see proof of a government cover-up. Since then, Trump administration officials have tried to cast themselves as promoting transparency in the case, including by requesting from courts the unsealing of grand jury transcripts. 'The government is the logical party to make comprehensive disclosure to the public of the Epstein file,' Judge Berman wrote in an apparent reference to the justice department's refusal to release additional records on its own while simultaneously moving to unseal grand jury transcripts. 'By comparison,' he added, 'the instant grand jury motion appears to be a 'diversion' from the breadth and scope of the Epstein files in the government's possession. The grand jury testimony is merely a hearsay snippet of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged conduct.' Meanwhile, Maxwell was interviewed at a Florida courthouse weeks ago by US deputy attorney general Todd Blanche, and the house oversight committee had also said that it wanted to speak with Maxwell. Her lawyers said they would be open to an interview but only if the panel were to ensure immunity from prosecution. In a letter Maxwell's lawyers, representative James Comer, the committee chairman, wrote that the committee was willing to delay the deposition until after the resolution of Maxwell's appeal to the Supreme Court. That appeal is expected to be resolved in late September. Mr Comer wrote that while Maxwell's testimony was 'vital' to the Republican-led investigation into Epstein, the committee would not provide immunity or any questions in advance of her testimony, as was requested by her team.
The Independent
38 minutes ago
- The Independent
Texas judge blocks Ten Commandments in public schools with epic ruling that quotes Sonny & Cher, Kurt Vonnegut and Billy Graham
A federal judge in Texas has temporarily blocked state law requiring the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom, setting up a possible Supreme Court showdown after several Republican-led states have tried, and failed, to implement similar laws. The Texas law, which was set to take effect September 1, likely violates the First Amendment's prohibitions against government interference and endorsement of religion, according to Tuesday's order from District Judge Fred Biery. His colorful 55-page ruling quotes from Sonny & Cher, Greta Garbo and Kurt Vonnegut as well as Supreme Court rulings, historians and prominent faith leaders, from Billy Graham and Pat Robertson to the Buddha. 'Ultimately, in matters of conscience, faith, beliefs and the soul, most people are Garbo-esque,' he wrote, referencing her line 'I want to be alone' from the film Grand Hotel. 'They just want to be left alone, neither proselytized nor ostracized, including what occurs to their children in government-run schools.' Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton will appeal, his office told The Independent. Under legislation approved by Texas lawmakers and signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott earlier this year, all public elementary or secondary schools must 'display in a conspicuous place in each classroom of the school a durable poster or framed copy of the Ten Commandments.' A lawsuit was filed by a group of Texas families with Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Unitarian Universalist, and nonreligious backgrounds, including clergy, with children in public schools. The judge agreed with plaintiffs that those displays 'are likely to pressure' children 'into religious observance, meditation on, veneration, and adoption' of the state's favored religious doctrine while 'suppressing expression of their own religious or nonreligious background and beliefs,' according to the judge. Biety also agreed that 'these matters of individual conscience and the soul should be free of government interference and coercion.' The Ten Commandment won't necessarily be taught in schools, but 'the captive audience of students likely would have questions, which teachers would feel compelled to answer,' according to the judge. 'Teenage boys, being the curious hormonally driven creatures they are, might ask: 'Mrs. Walker, I know about lying and I love my parents, but how do I do adultery?'' the judge wrote. 'Truly an awkward moment for overworked and underpaid educators, who already have to deal with sex education issues … and a classic example of the law of unintended consequences in legislative edicts.' Rabbi Mara Nathan, the lead plaintiff in the case, said in a statement that 'children's religious beliefs should be instilled by parents and faith communities, not politicians and public schools.' Heather L. Weaver, senior counsel for the ACLU's Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, said the ruling 'ensures that our clients' schools will remain spaces where all students, regardless of their faith, feel welcomed and can learn without worrying that they do not live up to the state's preferred religious beliefs.' In his conclusion, the judge offered an olive branch to his critics. 'For those who disagree with the Court's decision and who would do so with threats, vulgarities and violence, Grace and Peace unto you,' he wrote. 'May humankind of all faiths, beliefs and non-beliefs be reconciled one to another. Amen.' In a statement to The Independent, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said 'the Ten Commandments are a cornerstone of our moral and legal heritage, and their presence in classrooms serves as a reminder of the values that guide responsible citizenship.' 'Texas will always defend our right to uphold the foundational principles that have built this nation, and I will absolutely be appealing this flawed decision,' he added. Lawmakers in Arkansas have advanced similar legislation, and Oklahoma's chief school officials mandated copies of the Bible and Ten Commandments in all classrooms with 'immediate and strict compliance.' Last year, District Judge John Wheadon deGravelles paused a similar Louisiana law that had swiftly drawn legal challenges from civil rights groups anticipating a Supreme Court battle. Legislation to incorporate Christian teachings in public schools joins a nationwide effort from conservative special interest groups to move public funds into religious education, dovetailing with efforts by Donald Trump's administration and across the country to let families use taxpayer funds to send their children to private schools. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court reached a surprise tie in a case that could decide whether Oklahoma could open the first-ever taxpayer funded Catholic public charter school, which triggered a high-profile legal battle to decide whether public funds can be used to create religious schools — setting up a major test to the First Amendment's establishment clause. The 4-4 decision, from which Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself, upheld a lower-court ruling that effectively blocked the school's opening — for now.
