Supreme Court latest: Judges rule on definition of 'woman' - as JK Rowling reacts
Analysis: Supreme Court decision has immediate real-world consequences
By Connor Gillies, Scotland correspondent
For years there has been a toxic, emotion-driven debate over gender and sex in this country. Today came clarity.
This was the legal crescendo in a saga that has rolled through the courts for more than half a decade.
It impacts half of the population in England, Scotland and Wales.
Five judges at the highest civil court in the land were unanimous: the legal definition of a woman is based on biological sex.
It essentially means holders of gender recognition certificates are not women in the eyes of the law.
Scottish government reacts to Supreme Court ruling
The Scottish government has reacted to the ruling, saying it accepts the judgment and that it "acted in good faith" over its interpretation of the Gender Recognition Act and the Equality Act.
A spokesperson added:
The Supreme Court rightly counselled against reading this judgement as a triumph of one or more groups in our society at the expense of another. It is not.
The ruling gives clarity between two pieces of relevant legislation passed at Westminster. We will now engage on the implications of the ruling. Protecting the rights of all will underpin our actions."
How will the ruling affect businesses?
One of the areas where today's ruling will no doubt have a large impact is on businesses, where employers must ensure employees feel represented and safe at work.
Philip Pepper, employment partner at law firm Shakespeare Martineau, said the ruling will offer long-term clarity for businesses.
He urged for the Equality Act 2010 to be "urgently" updated to prevent any "potential inequality of treatment" that may occur as a result of the judgment.
"Whilst that process is ongoing, employers should take extra care to ensure that transgender employees feel safe, represented and valued in the workplace," he said.
"Employers may have to rethink their policy towards single-sex spaces in the workplace, such as bathrooms and changing rooms, and ensure that all individuals have a suitable space that they feel comfortable in when needing to use those facilities.
"Some workplaces have become divided on the issue, which means communication, training and zero tolerance on bullying will be vital to ensure that transgender employees do not feel uncomfortable at work.
"While this decision will be disappointing for some, it ultimately offers a clear path forward for employers who can now ensure they stay on the right side of law."
JK Rowling reacts to Supreme Court ruling
JK Rowling has just shared her response to today's Supreme Court ruling.
The Harry Potter author is a supporter of For Women Scotland, the campaign group which took on the Scottish government in the case.
A 'really wounding' ruling
We've just had some reaction to today's ruling from diversity, equity and inclusion expert Hannah Ford.
She tells presenter Gareth Barlow that the Supreme Court's decision could be "really wounding" for the trans community and an uphill battle remains for employers ensuring their workplaces can be a safe space.
"They will very much see this judgement is wounding them and will be viewed as anti protectionist," she says.
"Many employees on the ground say that their real life experience is that they were underrepresented and that they're made to feel not part of the workforce."
However, Ford adds that many employers will benefit from the clarity of today's ruling.
"If we can take one positive from today's judgement, it's that in this finding that sex means biological sex and woman means biological woman, at least we have simplicity and clarity.
"So it is in one sense a triumph of sense over legal coherency."
Sturgeon owes me an apology, former SNP MP says
Joanna Cherry, the former SNP MP and women's rights campaigner, says Nicola Sturgeon owes her an apology for criticising her support for 'the rights of women and lesbians'.
"I'm a long-term feminist," she said. "I'm a lesbian who came out in the '80s and campaigned against Section 28.
"I've had to put up with my own party leader, Nicola Sturgeon, calling me a bigot and a transphobe for sticking up for the rights of women and lesbians.
"I think she owes all of us, not just me, and more importantly the women of Scotland, an apology."
Cherry, who lost her seat in last year's general election, also urged Scottish First Minister John Swinney and Sir Keir Starmer to "respect this judgement" and protect women's rights, as well as single-sex spaces.
Supreme Court ruling 'incredibly worrying', Stonewall says
Leading LGBTQ+ charity Stonewall has issued a statement on today's Supreme Court ruling, calling it "incredibly worrying" for the trans community.
"Stonewall shares the deep concern at the widespread implications for today's ruling from the Supreme Court," Simon Blake, Stonewall CEO, says.
"It will be incredibly worrying for the trans community and all of us who support them. It's important to be reminded the court strongly and clearly re-affirmed the Equality Act protects all trans people against discrimination, based on Gender Reassignment, and will continue to do so.
"Once we read and fully digest the judgement, we will work with stakeholders across all sectors to provide as much clarity as possible.
"Stonewall will continue its work with the Government and parliamentarians to achieve equal rights under the law for LGBTQ+ people."
John Swinney: Protecting rights of all will underpin our actions
We've just had a statement from John Swinney, the Scottish first minister - as you know, the ruling this morning was in the case For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers and was the culmination of a years-long fight between the Scottish government and campaigners.
Posting on X, Swinney says the Scottish government accepts the judgment...
Watch: Women break into song after ruling
Here's the moment that women in Edinburgh broke out into song after the Supreme Court's ruling this morning.
Our Scotland correspondent Connor Gillies was there to witness it...
'Victory for common sense' - politicians react
We've heard from the UK government - here's the reaction from other politicians, including Kemi Badenoch.
The Tory leader lauded the "victory" at court, adding: "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."
'Apology letters'
Rosie Duffield, a former Labour MP and outspoken supporter of For Women Scotland, the campaign group that brought the case, posted on social media: "We're all going to need industrial-sized postboxes to accommodate all the grovelling apology letters - biggest one for all the women in Scotland who were never ever going to weesht!"
Weesht is a term used in Scotland meaning "hush" - or "whisht".
In a separate statement, she said she was "just thrilled and relieved".
'Government must clarify guidance'
Mims Davies, the shadow minister for women, shared a "well done" message for For Women Scotland, but added the government must clarify guidance to reflect the Supreme Court's ruling.
"This morning's decision is important for women right across our country," she added.
"This is a clear victory for common sense - and should never have taken a court case to prove the biological definition of a woman."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Powys County Times
18 minutes ago
- Powys County Times
Winter fuel U-turn should have come a long time ago, Reeves told
The decision to reinstate the winter fuel payment should have been made 'a long time ago', Scotland's Social Justice Secretary has said. Chancellor Rachel Reeves said on Monday that nine million pensioners will be in receipt of the payment this year after a cut was announced in the first weeks of the Labour Government last summer. The initial decision was met with heavy backlash and forced the Scottish Government to delay the implementation of its own devolved benefit. John Swinney's administration later announced a similar payment for pensioners which would be tapered and see those on the highest incomes receiving £100, compared to £305.10 for those on the least. Monday's announcement will result in cash being sent to the devolved administration at Holyrood, and Scottish Labour has urged the Government to increase its payments. But Scotland's Social Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville said the decision was 'a betrayal' of pensioners. 'I welcome any extension of eligibility by the UK Government, but this is a U-turn the Chancellor should have made a long time ago,' she said. 'But there is still no detail about how the Chancellor intends to go about that. Unfortunately, it still sounds as if many pensioners will miss out.' Ms Somerville added that the Scottish Government had not been consulted on the decision and urged UK ministers to 'ensure the Scottish Government is fully appraised of the proposed changes as soon as possible'. 'The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government wrote to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury last week to urge the UK Government to share its plans with us as quickly as possible, so that we can understand any implications for our own programmes and, crucially, our budget,' she said. Scottish Labour MSP Paul O'Kane said: 'The winter fuel payment is a devolved payment in Scotland and Scottish Labour has long been clear that we want to see it reinstated for the majority of pensioners up here – but despite their loud spin, the SNP voted against our attempts to do so. 'The SNP must not go ahead with plans that would rob poorer pensioners in order to fund payments for millionaires. 'The SNP must re-examine their own proposals in light of this game-changing announcement, ensure payments reach those most in need, and give a cast-iron guarantee that no struggling Scottish pensioners will be left out of pocket under their plans.' The Scottish Government's plans were initially to provide a universal payment to pensioners, but the proposals were scuppered by the Chancellor's announcement of the cut last summer, forcing ministers to create a different system for this winter.
Powys County Times
18 minutes ago
- Powys County Times
School loses Supreme Court bid over Christian staff member sacked for LGBT posts
A school in a years-long legal battle involving a staff member who was sacked after sharing social media posts about LGBT+ relationships teaching cannot take the case to the Supreme Court, justices have ruled. Kristie Higgs, a Christian mother of two, was sacked from her role at Farmor's School in Fairford, Gloucestershire, in 2019 for sharing Facebook posts criticising teaching about LGBT+ relationships in schools. In February, she won a Court of Appeal battle related to her dismissal, with three senior judges finding that the decision to sack her for gross misconduct was 'unlawfully discriminatory' and 'unquestionably a disproportionate response'. The school sought to appeal against the ruling at the Supreme Court in March, but three justices refused to give the school the green light to challenge the decision in the UK's highest court. In a decision on Thursday, which was published on Monday, Lord Reed, Lord Hamblen, and Lady Simler said that the school had asked for the go-ahead to appeal against the ruling on four grounds. But they said that the Supreme Court 'does not have jurisdiction' to hear three of the grounds, and the fourth 'does not raise an arguable question of law'. In response to the decision, Mrs Higgs said: 'I am relieved and grateful to the Supreme Court for this common-sense decision. 'Christians have the right to express their beliefs on social media and at other non-work-related settings without fear of being punished by their employer.' Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre – which supported Mrs Higgs' case, said: 'We welcome the Supreme Court's decision, which brings a decisive closure to this extraordinary case.' She continued: 'The Court of Appeal confirmed, loud and clear, that ideological censorship in the workplace, particularly against sincerely held Christian convictions, is illegal. 'This latest decision from the Supreme Court is further proof that our tireless work at the Christian Legal Centre, in defending so many Christian freedoms cases, has not been in vain.' Mrs Higgs, who worked as a pastoral administrator and work experience manager at the school, shared two posts on a private page under her maiden name in October 2018 to about 100 friends, which raised concerns about relationship education at her son's Church of England primary school. She either copied and pasted from another source or reposted the content, adding her own reference in one post to 'brainwashing our children'. BREAKING: The Supreme Court has today refused to hear the appeal of Farmor's School in Fairford, Gloucestershire of the landmark Kristie Higgs Court of Appeal ruling. In February 2025, in a seminal judgment for Christian freedom and free speech, the Court of Appeal had reversed… — Christian Concern (@CConcern) June 9, 2025 Pupils were to learn about the No Outsiders In Our School programme, a series of books that teach the Equality Act in primary schools. An employment tribunal found in 2020 that while Mrs Higgs' religion was a protected characteristic, her dismissal was lawful, but this decision was overturned by an Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in 2023. But the EAT ruled the case should be sent back to an employment tribunal for a fresh decision, which Mrs Higgs' lawyers challenged in the Court of Appeal as 'unnecessary'. In a judgment, Lord Justice Underhill, sitting with Lord Justice Bean and Lady Justice Falk, ruled in Mrs Higgs' favour in February, stating: 'The dismissal of an employee merely because they have expressed a religious or other protected belief to which the employer, or a third party with whom it wishes to protect its reputation, objects will constitute unlawful direct discrimination within the meaning of the Equality Act.'
Edinburgh Reporter
20 minutes ago
- Edinburgh Reporter
Council approves purchase of more homes on Dreghorn Estate
The council's Finance Committee has approved spending £6.65 million to purchase 38 homes currently owned by the Ministry of Defence, bringing the total number bought in this development for rent by the council to 78. The council says this action, unanimously approved on Monday morning, will prevent 15 civilian households becoming homeless, and will help the local authority deal with the housing emergency. There was a lot of comment during the meeting on the positive way that the collaboration between council officers and the residents had been conducted. But one member of the committee, Cllr Simita Kumar, who leads the SNP group, said that she had to rely on social media for much of her information. She said: ''Securing these 38 homes is a step forward for residents and local housing, but this is just the start of the process. The uncertainty tenants have faced shows the Council and Ministry of Defence must do much better on communication. 'As we await condition surveys, it's clear significant investment will be needed to make these homes safe, energy-efficient, and truly fit to live in.' Cllr Watt said she and the officers had tried to be disciplined about communication but there were several stakeholders involved who had been quick to share information. As part of what was approved today the council officers will set up regular periodic calls with residents which councillors can join to receive the most up to date information. At the meeting Most councillors attended the Special Meeting online, as is usual for a special meeting, although Cllrs Simita Kumar, Joan Griffiths and Phil Doggart as well as the Convener Cllr Mandy Watt were in the Dean of Guild Court Room along with council officers. Local councillor Conor Savage also sat in the public gallery supporting the residents who were there to present a deputation. Finance and Resources Convener Mandy Watt said: 'We're doing everything we can to make sure these residents will remain in their homes and to increase the amount of affordable and social housing we have in the city – and I know the residents are very grateful that this proposal has had so much support from councillors. 'Purchasing these homes is a sensible way to boost the housing we have, and Dreghorn is a community that provides a great place for council tenants to have a suitable, safe and affordable place to call home. 'Council colleagues have worked over many months to negotiate this purchase from the Ministry of Defence, listening to the concerns of Dreghorn residents at every turn and ensuring good value for the council. This is a huge step towards a positive outcome – a fantastic example of doing things differently to make sure we address our housing emergency.' The financial details are set out in the council report: 6.1 The net purchase price of £6,650,000 will be funded with £3,289,000 from the Scottish Government National Acquisition Fund grant delivered through the Affordable Housing Supply Programme with the balance of £3,361,000 funded through rental income and prudentially borrowed over a 30-year period. 6.2 In addition to the purchase price, additional capital works for asbestos removal, lettable standard works, net zero carbon and lifecycle costs have been estimated at £4,737,232 in total (£124,664 per unit). 6.3 The principal re-payment for the net purchase costs, asbestos removal and lettable standard works, is estimated at £4,794,772 plus interest costs of £3,972,565 at 5.25% interest rate, a total loans charge cost of £8,767,337 over the 30-year period. Annual average costs are £292,245. 6.4 The funding requirements for net zero carbon and lifecycle costs will be factored into future years' HRA budgets and approved through the relevant annual budget setting process. 6.5 The purchase of the 38 properties is estimated to generate additional net income to the HRA of £135,522 by year 10, which increases to £1,967,023 by year 30. This has been calculated using the same percentage rental income increase assumptions as used in the 2025/26 HRA Business Plan. Dreghorn residents Deputation Three of the residents from Dreghorn addressed the committee, and spoke of the uncertainty they were living under for the last six months. Reident Mandy Burgen said: 'What sits before you this morning is a proposal that is a testament of determination and what can be achieved when we all work together collaboratively. 'It proves that solutions can be found and that circumstances can be changed. In March, we sat before you with the support of Living Rent and raised awareness of the desolate prospects that were evolving for the families of the Dreghorn Estate. 'Today proves you listened, and now we ask you to act and that our voices be heard again. 'Since November 2024 the families in the Dreghorn community have been no strangers to the feelings of dejection. Imagine feelings of deprived aspirations, a constant sense of futurelessness and having to hit the pause button on every aspect of your lives. It isn't about losing a house. It's about losing our homes, our family security and livelihoods and the fear of being ejected from our community connections on a micro and macro sociological level.' Another resident, Amy Monaghan, explained that she is a worried single disabled mother of two children, both of whom are neurodivergent. She said: 'I work as a dinner lady at one of the schools local to Dreghorn Estate and also care for my autistic brother part-time. November of last year, I've been living under a cloud of constant fear and anxiety that I would lose my house, possibly lose my job because of it, and that my children will lose their friends and stability that's been hard earned over the past few difficult years. 'For my family this house represents more than four walls to shelter in. We've built relationships within our community, discovered support systems, and adapted out lives around a space that is perfect for the complex needs of my children. Our neighbours have become our extended family through this ordeal and having the community is what has helped us cope – and beyond that will help us thrive.' Catherine Lomax spoke on behalf of her daughter who is a disabled adult living independently in the Dreghorn Estate, but who has been affected by the threat of eviction. She said: 'The situation was hopeless, and Sarah was in the depths of depression and anxiety. The threat of eviction was devastating. She was desperately stressed and stopped doing all her normal activities as her mind was entirely focused on becoming homeless. Her coping mechanism was to run away and hide. Since then, the whole community has pulled together to support each other. Losing her home would be a terrible upheaval of her life, but now we have hope that she will keep it and as an added bonus, the campaign has resulted in deep friendships and support within the community.' Cllr Kumar commented that the residents had painted a really positive picture of their dealings with the council officers and elected members, but wondered if they had an ask for what would happen now. The residents replied that the future of Dreghorn is to keep building the community and that working together is testament to the housing policy – and 'that we can make these things work'. Cllr Younie also asked about the new residents association and what they would like the council to do to better support them moving forward. The reply was the same: 'Going forward it is about building sustainable communities. Through this we have bonded even tighter together.' The Finance Convener asked what it would mean to the residents and Ms Burgen said that personally it would allow her to make plans again. She said: 'The incredible amount of work means security. When this news broke six months ago I was in America at my daughter's wedding. She wanted me to go and see her in August. I have had to hit the pause button on that as I didn't know – I could have been homeless going forward. When we saw this proposal today we were over the moon about it and we just ask everybody to pass this proposal today.' Cllr Savage began his address to the committee with thank yous – particularly for council officers and councillors. He said: I want to thank the residents for their patience and engagement, especially given the pressure and uncertainty they've been under. I am confident the residents association will grow going forward. 'These are homes not just houses, and today we have a unique opportunity to save the community, tackle the housing crisis and homelessness in the city.' Cllr Savage said to The Edinburgh Reporter after the meeting: 'I am incredibly happy. We heard from the deputation the impact this whole situation has had on them, so I am happy to see that the committee has approved this. There has been so much hard work done on this by council officers, by the council, other elected officials and as I said to the meeting the work done on collaborating and engaging has been absolutely essential.' Asked about the unknown level of costs – which could be as much as £4.737 million to remedy asbestos in the properties and upgrade them to net zero carbon homes, Cllr Savage did not reply, saying instead: 'I think we have a unique opportunity to save a community to tackle the housing crisis in the city as well as homelessness, in what in my opinion is a good deal as well.' Cllr Doggart asked for more clarity about the repairs needing done to these houses. He said: 'Are we buying properties that are not in a particularly good state at the moment?' He was assured by the council officers that there will be condition surveys carried out as part of the conditions of purchase. Council officers believe there will only be a little work required on the basis of the condition of previous homes purchased. When the purchase is settled the existing leases will be terminated, and capital spending will afterwards be incurred on the repairs. Cllr Doggart asked about the future level of rents receivable. Council officers said that these would be individual conversations with tenants and so had not yet been finalised. Cllr Doggart was assured the purchase price reflects current condition and an officer confirmed that when the houses are purchased – probably in September or October – any remedial works will then be scheduled. Green councillor Alex Staniforth asked that the council maintains the green space around the development to a high standard. The council will become liable for a charge for this common area when they take over ownership, and this was agreed as part of the committee decision. In summing up Cllr Watt said she was happy about the level of support this proposal has had, and this decision of the committee will be referred to full council next week for ratification. Like this: Like Related
