Trans rights supporters rally outside UK parliament after landmark ruling
Thousands of people on Saturday rallied in central London in support of trans rights, after a landmark court ruling on the definition of a "woman".
Britain's Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that the legal definition of a "woman" is based on a person's sex at birth, with potentially far-reaching consequences for how single-sex spaces and services are run.
At a protest in Parliament Square, activists, protesters, trade unions and community groups waved flags and held up banners with slogans such as "trans women are women!" and "trans rights are human rights".
"My main fear -- the extremists will feel empowered by this decision. Hate crimes against (the) trans community (will) go up," said Eevee Zayas, a 32-year-old researcher from Spain, describing themself as non binary transgender.
The court ruling said that single-sex spaces and services including changing rooms, toilets and women-only hospital wards "will function properly only if sex is interpreted as biological sex".
"Everything in the transition is going to be harder. Coming here in big numbers is very important to stand gainst the Supreme Court decision," added Joe Brown, a trans woman in the process of transitioning.
Brown said other fears included not being able to access health care and children being scared to come out as trans.
The court ruling followed a legal battle between the Scottish government and campaign group For Women Scotland (FWS) involving clashing interpretations of the Equality Act.
While the Scottish government argued that the law gave trans women with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) the same protections as a biological female, the campaign group disagreed.
har/giv
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Nursery parents win closure review but concerns remain
Aberdeenshire Council has agreed to pause the mothballing of four rural nurseries. Parents were told in April that Ballogie, Crossroads, Glass and Sandhaven nurseries would close at the end of term. Councillors have now agreed to put those decisions on hold while it reviews its guidance around how it consults with families. Campaigners have welcomed the move, but said they had lost confidence in the local authority. At a special meeting of the full council, councillors agreed to pause all future mothballing - which means closing premises but keeping them in a condition ready for future use - while a review of guidance was carried out. During the meeting, councillors on the local authority's ruling administration decided not to allow members of the public to give their views. Campaigner and parent Lindsay Love told BBC Scotland News: ''We all came hoping to speak on behalf of our communities and we were silenced.''' She said she had mixed emotions about the decision to pause mothballing. Ms Love said: ''I'm nervous that they are actually going to move forward with integrity. I feel like they're trying to control the narrative now. "We just need to make sure that we're protecting our nurseries and our rural communities as best as we can." She added: "Whilst is it a good thing that they've decided to pause the mothballing, I don't have a huge amount of confidence in them as an institution to do the right thing.'' More stories from North East Scotland, Orkney and Shetland Listen to news from North East Scotland on BBC Sounds Council leader Gillian Owen said the council had carefully reflected on what parents had been calling for. No timescale was given for the review. Ms Owen said: ''I think we're looking at doing a review quite swiftly but we've got to wait for the Scottish government guidelines.'' She denied families had been "silenced" by not being allowed to speak at the meeting. The councillor added: "We've actually made the changes that they want. ''They must look at that as an actual celebration, not as a slight.'' When the move to mothball the nurseries was announced at the start of the Easter school holidays, it sparked a backlash from local communities. Since then, families have been campaigning to keep them open, arguing the decision was made without proper consultation. The Scottish government also wrote to Aberdeenshire Council to highlight the need to consult parents in such cases. Last week, the local authority's ruling administration said it wanted to pause the controversial plans. Aberdeenshire Council Tory leader stands down Nursery mothballing move taking 'extreme toll' Officials mothballing school branded undemocratic Aberdeenshire Council
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
New Trump travel ban takes effect
President Trump's travel ban targeting a dozen countries went into effect on Monday, the latest step by the White House to crack down on the number of individuals entering the U.S. The new policy fully restricts the entry into the United States of nationals from Afghanistan, Chad, the Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Myanmar, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. It also partially restricts entry into the U.S. for nationals coming from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela. The policy makes exceptions for nationals from all 19 of those countries who are lawful permanent residents of the United States or existing visa holders and individuals 'whose entry serves U.S. national interests.' The travel ban is taking effect amid rising tensions in Los Angeles around immigration raids in the city. Trump and White House officials have argued the travel restrictions are based on national security concerns, specifically with vetting procedures involving the listed countries. Trump's attempts to restrict entry into the United States from certain Muslim-majority countries in his first term drew legal challenges and protests at airports across the country. This time around, experts have suggested he is likely on firmer legal footing in part because of a Supreme Court ruling that upheld the third version of his first-term ban and in part because the administration laid the groundwork with an executive order focused on enhanced vetting. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Rep. Mary Miller's complaints about a Sikh guest chaplain reveal a startling ignorance
Republican Rep. Mary Miller of Illinois has an unfortunate track record when it comes to respect for minority communities. At a rally for Donald Trump in 2020, for example, the GOP congresswoman credited the president for the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade, calling it a 'victory for white life.' Her team insisted that she'd simply misread a prepared text — Miller apparently meant to say 'right to life' instead of 'white life' — though the same Illinois Republican, a year later, was forced to apologize for approvingly quoting Adolf Hitler. Last week, the congresswoman added to her list of ugly and offensive comments. The Hill reported: Rep. Mary Miller (R-Ill.) said it was 'deeply disturbing' that a Sikh delivered a prayer in the House chamber on Friday — after apparently mistaking him for a Muslim man. The since-deleted post Friday morning sparked immediate bipartisan criticism. The trouble apparently began when Miller saw Giani Surinder Singh of the Gurdwara South Jersey Sikh Society serve as a guest chaplain on the U.S. House floor and deliver an invocation. For those unfamiliar with Capitol Hill, this is quite common: Faith leaders from different religious backgrounds and different parts of the country are routinely welcomed to serve as guest chaplains. Miller, however, apparently wasn't pleased. 'It's deeply troubling that a Muslim was allowed to lead prayer in the House of Representatives this morning. This should never have been allowed to happen,' the three-term GOP lawmaker wrote online. 'America was founded as a Christian nation, and I believe our government should reflect that truth, not drift further from it. May God have mercy!' It's not easy for a politician to squeeze so much ignorance into a single tweet, but Miller managed to pull it off. She then proceeded to delete her missive, not because it was offensive, but because she got the chaplain's faith tradition wrong. Miller then republished the same tweet, repeating the same complaint, this time swapping out the word 'Muslim' for 'Sikh.' When this generated bipartisan criticisms, she deleted the second tweet, too. At this point, I could spend several paragraphs explaining the differences between Muslims and Sikhs, followed by a few more paragraphs about how absurd it is to think that the secular U.S. Constitution, which guarantees religious freedom for all, created 'a Christian nation.' But as important as those details are, I was also struck by Miller's unexpected candor. Sometimes, conservatives suggest their religion should get preferential treatment over other faith traditions, First Amendment be damned. But Miller didn't bother with hints: She came right out and made this point explicitly. If Miller wants to argue that Congress shouldn't bring any religious leaders in for these official ceremonies, there would at least be room for that conversation as it relates to the separation of church and state. But that's clearly not what she argued in her since-deleted items: The Illinois Republican is fine with congressional invocations, so long religions she likes are favored over religions she dislikes. It is as antithetical to the principles of religious liberty in the United States as anything any member of Congress has said in quite a while. This article was originally published on
