Legal chiefs blast MSP for attack on Supreme Court judges after ‘women' ruling
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
SCOTLAND's top legal briefs have launched a scathing attack on a pro-trans Scottish Green MSP for risking the safety of judges after the Supreme Court case on the definition of a woman.
Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, Roddy Dunlop KC, blasted Maggie Chapman after she claimed the ruling showed "bigotry, prejudice and hatred".
Sign up for the Politics newsletter
Sign up
2
Scottish Green MSP Maggie Chapman is refusing to apologise for her remarks.
Credit: Alamy
2
Dean of the Faculty of Advocates Roddy Dunlop KC.
In a letter to the convenor of Holyrood's equalities committee, for which Ms Chapman is deputy, Mr Dunlop accused the MSP of an "egregious breach" of duties relating to upholding the independence of the courts.
And he said the attack on judges was worse than the Court of Appeal being branded "enemies of the people" after Brexit or Tory attacks on so-called "activist" lawyers.
Mr Dunlop wrote: "They go further than that, and create a risk of danger to the Members of the Court themselves. This behaviour is irresponsible and reprehensible.
"Faculty very much regrets having to write this letter. However, Ms Chapman's words have left it with no choice. Her behaviour in this instance is utterly beyond the pale."
Ms Chapman, who represents North East Scotland at Holyrood, made the controversial remarks during a speech at a pro-trans rally on Saturday in Aberdeen.
In a social media clip, she tells activists: 'We say 'not in our name' to the bigotry, prejudice and hatred that we see coming from the Supreme Court and from so many other institutions in our society. Not in our name, never in our name.'
However, despite the backlash and calls for her to stand down from her position on the committee, Ms Chapman has refused to apologise.
She told reporters at Holyrood on Tuesday: 'I think one of the really important things in my role as an MSP and as a member of the Equalities Committee is to stand up and represent trans people.
'There are lots of politicians across Scotland who are prepared to represent people who don't think trans people should have the same rights as you or I, I'm prepared to stand up and represent trans people.'
In response to the letter from the faculty, Ms Chapman added: 'I'm not going to apologise, I stand by my comments.'
The Scottish Green MSP also claimed there has been an 'upswelling of hate, of targeting of trans people' in the past week since the ruling by the Supreme Court.
A panel of five judges declared that a "woman" in the Equality Act refers to a 'biological woman and biological sex'.
And they criticised SNP ministers for pushing an 'incoherent' interpretation that would leave women's rights worse off.
Scottish Tory shadow equalities minister Tess White said: 'This unprecedented intervention from the Faculty of Advocates is a measure of just how appalling and unacceptable Maggie Chapman's comments were.
'Her outrageous attack on the integrity of the highest court in the land and her refusal to accept its legal ruling demonstrate her blind prejudice on gender self-ID and makes her position as deputy convenor of the equalities committee completely untenable.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
Nicola Sturgeon's ‘political instinct' to back a united Ireland
However, the former Scottish first minister insisted the issue of Northern Ireland's future is for people there to decide. She stressed that was the case because she said she could 'get bit prickly if people from outside Scotland start to say what's best for Scotland'. However, speaking to the Nolan Show on BBC Radio Ulster, she stated: 'My political instinct would be in favour of a united Ireland. 'But that's not a matter for me.' Ms Sturgeon continued that as a supporter of Scottish independence, she believes that 'Westminster governance has not served Scotland well', adding that she is 'not sure it will have served Northern Ireland well'. The former SNP leader said: 'I think what Brexit did to Northern Ireland and has done to Scotland is probably an example of the downsides of Westminster governments.' However, she that 'detailed assessments' over whether the province's future should be in the UK or as part of a united Ireland were 'for people in Northern Ireland to make'.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Labour braced for wave of legal action over migrant hotels as immigration crisis deepens
Labour is bracing for a wave of legal action that could displace thousands of asylum seekers after councils across England signalled they could seek to ban hotels for migrants. Home Office minister Dan Jarvis has said that the government is working on contingency plans for housing asylum seekers after Epping Forest District Council was granted a temporary High Court injunction, forcing the removal of the 136 migrants who live there, in a landmark ruling on Tuesday. The order blocks asylum seekers from being housed at The Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex, which has been the site of a series of violent protests that have seen police officers injured and multiple people arrested for disorder in recent weeks. Former Tory immigration minister Robert Jenrick called for 'all patriotic councils to follow Epping's lead and pursue injunctions', and deputy leader of Reform, Richard Tice, urged residents to protest at hotels housing migrants to force their removal. Shadow home secretary Chris Philp has demanded Labour hold an emergency cabinet meeting to address the 'migrant crisis', and called on home secretary Yvette Cooper to commit that none of the asylum seekers in The Bell would be moved into hotels, houses, apartments or social housing. He cited Tory plans to use larger sites to house asylum seekers, despite the National Audit Office finding use of former military bases to be significantly more expensive than paying for hotel accommodation. Analysis of Home Office figures by The Independent shows that the government has already made progress on cutting the asylum backlog, with the number of people waiting for initial decisions on their applications dropping to 78,000 from its peak of 133,000 in 2023 under the Tory government. While over 100,000 asylum seekers are being housed by the government as they wait for their claims, just a third - 32,345 people - are in hotels. In London, as many as 65 per cent of asylum seekers are housed in hotels as the government scrambles for limited accommodation. Hotels cost the government up to £170 a night per asylum seeker – around six times higher than other forms of accommodation, according to the Migration Observatory. At least eleven district or borough councils – including some Labour-led ones – have now said that they will assess their legal options after the Epping ruling, two more are in conversation with the Home Office about changes to hotels in their area, and a further four said they would monitor developments in the legal bid. Reform-run county councils have also said they will push for legal action against any hotels in their areas, however, decisions to bring a legal challenge over planning restrictions will be down to individual districts. Charity Refugee Council said that 'everyone agrees that hotels are the wrong answer' and called on the Home Office to resolve asylum applications quickly, so 'people can either rebuild their lives here or return home with dignity'. Steve Smith, CEO of Care4Calais, said that ministers had 'failed in its first duty to protect the residents of The Bell Hotel' and subjected them to 'weeks of hate'. He added: 'It's the government's failure to protect the residents that opened the space for a challenge on planning grounds, which has handed the far-right something to claim victory on'. Mr Jarvis, the security minister, said that asylum seekers in Epping would be 'appropriately accommodated' at other sites – but failed to rule out that they would not simply be moved to other hotels. He added that 'we'll see over the next few days and weeks' whether more legal cases will follow. Spelthorne borough council said it was 'working closely with legal counsel in light of the recent High Court ruling', which it said 'may have significant implications' for a hotel in Stanwell. A Labour council leader in Tamworth, Staffordshire, where violence broke out against asylum seekers in hotels during the riots last year, said that they were reviewing legal options in light of the Epping judgement. Carol Dean said the council hadn't sought an injunction against the hotel in its area when it was first used in 2022 because other legal challenges had been unsuccessful, but that they would be 'reviewing our legal position in light of this significant ruling'. Labour-led Wirral council also said it was considering its options after being told by the Home Office at the end of June that a former hotel in the area will soon be used to house single male asylum seekers. The former hotel is currently being used to house asylum-seeking families, and no planning application has been made to change the use of the hotel, the council said. In South Ribble, Lancashire, the council said that use of asylum hotels in its area had been 'imposed on us by government', and it would 'explore all of our options'. Simon Tagg, leader of Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council, said that while there are no asylum hotels in their area, they had continuing concerns about the use of Houses of Multiple Occupation and short-term lets for migrants. Leader of Newcastle City Council, Cllr Karen Kilgour, said that the use of hotels for asylum seekers was 'not appropriate or sustainable' and added that the council were in 'active discussions with the Home Office' about getting more control over the placement of asylum seekers in the city. In South Norfolk, the council said it had already issued an enforcement notice on the owners of an asylum hotel in early August, requiring them to submit a planning application for a change of use. In the Epping case, the hotel's owners Somani Hotels Ltd failed to apply for a change of use after they received advice that it would not be necessary. Mr Justice Eyre ruled against them on Tuesday, saying that there was an arguable case that The Bell was no longer a hotel. Several councils contacted by The Independent said that while they had asylum hotels in their area, they had no intention of seeking legal action to move refugees out.
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Tulsi Gabbard revokes security clearances for 37 US intelligence officials
The Trump administration has revoked the security clearances of 37 current and former US officials, accusing them of politicising intelligence for partisan or personal a memo posted on social media, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard directed several national security agency heads to immediately strip the officials of their clearances, stating the move was ordered by President Donald officials include several national security staffers who served under former Democratic presidents Joe Biden and Barack offered no evidence to support the accusations in the memo. Security clearances grant access to sensitive government information, and some former officials retain them to advise successors. Some private sector jobs such as those in defence and aerospace can require access to security clearances as a pre-condition for remains unclear whether all 37 individuals listed in the memo still held active said Trump ordered the revocations because the officials "abused the public trust by politicizing and manipulating intelligence, leaking classified intelligence without authorization, and or committing intentional egregious violations of tradecraft standards"."Being entrusted with a security clearance is a privilege, not a right," Gabbard wrote on X. "Those in the Intelligence Community who betray their oath to the Constitution and put their own interests ahead of the interests of the American people have broken the sacred trust they promised to uphold." The memo did not lay out specific charges against specific is not the first time the Trump administration has revoked security clearances for intelligence officials. The administration has previously revoked clearances of Biden, his Vice-President Kamala Harris, and former lawmakers involved in investigations of the 6 January Capitol recent weeks, Gabbard has led the charge against intelligence officials under former President Barack Obama who concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 elections, which Trump won. Trump and Gabbard have described the intelligence community's assessment as a "treasonous conspiracy" to undermine the president's electoral success. Democrats have dismissed the moves as a political distraction, and accused the White House of deflecting attention from unpopular policies and Trump's alleged ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. "These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction," a spokesman for Obama said last month.
