School leaders call for urgent ‘sensitive' guidance after gender ruling
The Government must provide schools with 'non-divisive and sensitive' guidance following the Supreme Court's ruling on the legal definition of a woman, a school leaders' union has said.
Schools must remain 'safe, inclusive spaces' for all staff, children and families, delegates at the annual conference of the NAHT heard.
Last month, the UK's highest court ruled the terms 'woman' and 'sex' in the 2010 Equality Act 'refer to a biological woman and biological sex'.
This means transgender women with a gender recognition certificate (GRC) can be excluded from single-sex spaces if 'proportionate'.
School leaders are being put in a 'very difficult' position as they try to understand what the ruling means for staff and pupils, the conference heard.
Delegates voted to call on the NAHT executive to write to the Education Secretary to request 'urgent support and information' for schools.
An emergency motion, which was passed at the conference in Harrogate on Saturday, also called on the NAHT to lobby the Government to provide schools with 'non-divisive and sensitive guidance' so they know what the law means and so they remain 'safe, inclusive spaces' for staff, children and families.
Delegate Sarah Hewitt-Clarkson, from Birmingham, who proposed the motion, said the Government should provide inclusive, safe and 'dignified' guidance for school leaders to help them navigate the new law successfully.
She said: 'The Supreme Court judgment has had an immediate impact and implications for some of our members, thrown them into turmoil as they are faced with impossible decisions about everyday practices.
'It has already been divisive.'
Ms Hewitt-Clarkson added: 'This motion is asking Government for clarity to help us lead our way through this whilst ensuring everyone's dignity and safety remain intact.
'Our union's policy position already states that our schools must be inclusive, safe places for all, but the new law has left some unsafe and seemingly unprotected.
'It feels as if the load has been given to school leaders to sort their own way through it, which is unfair and leaves us all vulnerable.'
Delegate Debra Walker, from Sunderland, said: 'This ruling has many implications, many of which concern me and worry me, but I don't even know what I don't know.
'I have so many unknown unknowns that I'm very worried.
'The DfE's (Department for Education's) job should be to anticipate the impact on us as leaders, on our organisations, and act with urgency to protect us from the myriad of consequences of this ruling.'
The motion, which was unanimously carried, also called on the NAHT executive to support the TUC Trade Unions for Trans Rights Network by 'publicising activities to members and encouraging participation'.
Last month, delegates at the annual conference of the NASUWT voted to call on the teaching union to 'campaign and collectivise against any knee-jerk policy changes in educational settings' in response to the ruling.
On Monday, the Government said it will not be hurried into publishing guidance for schools on how to support children who are questioning their gender.
Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said it was important the right information was provided to schools.
Draft guidance for schools and colleges on how best to support pupils has been on hold since Labour entered Government.
It was published by the Conservative government in December 2023, with a consultation ending in March last year.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Southern Baptists endorse overturning same-sex marriage
Southern Baptist delegates overwhelmingly called to try to reinstitute a ban on same-sex marriage 10 years after the Supreme Court legalized the unions. While gathered at the 2025 national convention in Dallas on Tuesday, the delegates of the country's leading Protestant denomination voiced their goal of changing national policy on same-sex marriage. Southern Baptists have long been opposed to same-sex marriage, but the call this week for the Supreme Court to reverse its 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges ruling has strategists questioning if it was influenced by the 2022 reversal of Roe v. Wade, which was the constitutionally protected right to an abortion. The convention attracted thousands of pastors and church members from congregations across the country. The vote took place on the first day of the meeting, which gave a glimpse into the denomination's view on a number of political and cultural issues, The New York Times reported. The vote comes just after Gallup released survey results about a widening gap between Republicans and Democrats about their support for same-sex marriage. According to the polling, 68% of U.S. adults support same-sex marriage. Democrats' support has risen to 88% in 2025, while Republican support has dropped to 41%, the lowest since 2017. Southern Baptists acknowledged that their support for making same-sex marriage illegal puts them in the minority, but they say the nonbinding resolution puts their views on the map. While the support for overturning Obergefell may not be a strong sentiment nationwide, the Southern Baptist enthusiasm could lead to political efforts to change the law, as seen in recent years with the support and eventual reversal of Roe. Several other resolutions and ideas were passed by delegates, including defunding Planned Parenthood, banning pornography and condemning sports betting. Southern Baptist Convention Resolution Committee Chair Dr. Andrew Walker acknowledged they have an uphill battle to finding broader support for the resolution, but he would 'love to see Obergefell overturned' and a marriage definition in the U.S. 'restored to the union of one man and one woman.' 'There is very little desire, even on the conservative side, I think, to go to bat for marriage in this particular culture. And I want to stress to the press, while we are making a policy and legal statement, I'm clear eyed about the difficulties and the headwinds in this resolution,' Walker said during a press conference. Walter said the resolutions passed by the delegates were statements that can and will inform the way policymakers view Southern Baptist sentiment and desires. The Times noted that Southern Baptist values are often viewed as a bellwether for evangelical conservatism. 'I understand that it is largely ingrained in the American psyche at this point,' Walker said of same-sex marriage. 'But the role of this resolution was to say Southern Baptists aren't going anywhere.'
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Wisconsin group sues Elon Musk, alleging million-dollar check giveaways were voter bribes
A Wisconsin watchdog group has filed a lawsuit against Elon Musk claiming that he unlawfully bribed voters with million-dollar checks and $100 giveaways in the state's latest Supreme Court election. Wisconsin Democracy Campaign — a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that investigates election transparency — along with two Wisconsin voters, filed the suit against Musk, his super PAC America PAC and another Musk-owned entity called the United States of America Inc. In the suit, the plaintiffs claimed that Musk and his entities violated state laws that prohibit vote bribery and unauthorized lotteries. It also accuses Musk of conducting civil conspiracy and acting as a public nuisance. Musk and America PAC did not respond to a request for comment. 'In the context of an election for Wisconsin's highest court, election bribery—providing more than $1 to induce electors (that is, voters) to vote— undermines voters' faith in the validity of the electoral system and the independence of the judiciary,' the suit reads. The complaint alleges that Musk violated state laws in giving away $100 to voters who signed a petition 'in opposition to activist judges' and handing out million-dollar checks to those who signed the petition. The suit says that those who had won the checks had voted for candidate Brad Schimel. At a town hall in Green Bay, Musk gave away million-dollar checks to two people, both of whom the suit claims voted for Schimel. In a video America PAC posted on X, one of the winners said he had voted for Schimel and encouraged others to do the same. 'Everyone needs to do what I just did, sign the petition, refer your friends, and go out to vote for Brad Schimel,' the winner, Nicholas Jacobs, said in the video. The suit mentions that Musk had said the $1 million awards would be given 'in appreciation' for those 'taking the time to vote.' Despite Musk's America PAC spending over $12 million on Schimel's campaign, candidate Susan Crawford won the race. Before the race had been called, Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul filed a similar lawsuit against Musk over his involvement in the state Supreme Court election, but a county judge declined to immediately hold a hearing. A Pennsylvania judge similarly declined a request to block Musk's million-dollar giveaways in the state. During the presidential election, Musk's America PAC had also given out million-dollar checks to people registered to vote in swing states, which the Justice Department had warned could be illegal. Musk defended his giveaways during the presidential election despite the allegations of unlawfulness by saying that those who signed the petition weren't given the money as a prize and that chance 'was not involved here.' Those who signed the petition were instead America PAC spokespeople with the 'opportunity to earn' $1 million. 'Make no mistake: an eligible voter's opportunity to earn is not the same thing as a chance to win,' Musk said, according to Reuters. Jeff Mandell, the co-founder of Law Forward — the law firm that filed the suit on behalf of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign — said in an interview with NBC News that this lawsuit has the advantage of additional time. 'The election is over. Some passions have cooled, and we are bringing this in a normal posture, asking the court to go through its normal procedure,' Mandell said. 'We are confident that we'll get a complete and fair adjudication.' The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign's lawsuit also seeks to bar Musk from 'replicating any such unlawful conduct in relation to future Wisconsin elections.' 'Almost everyone who was watching closely or saw what was happening here in Wisconsin in that very tight period was pretty horrified, and would say things like, 'Well, this can't possibly be legal,' or, 'He can't possibly get away with this,'' Mandell said. 'That's really the purpose of this lawsuit, is to make sure that a court does say — in accord with both the law and I think people across the political spectrum's intuition — that this is not legal conduct, this is not consistent with how our democracy works, and to make sure it doesn't happen again.' This article was originally published on
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Majority on Brazil court in favor of tougher social media rules
Brazil's Supreme Court reached a majority Wednesday in favor of toughening social media regulation, in a groundbreaking case for Latin America on the spread of fake news and hate speech. The South American country's highest court is seeking to determine to what extent companies such as X, TikTok, Instagram and Facebook are responsible for removing illegal content, and how they can be sanctioned if they do not. The judges' final ruling will create a precedent that will affect tens of millions of social media users in Brazil. At issue is a clause in the country's so-called Civil Framework for the Internet, a law in effect since 2014, that says platforms are only responsible for harm caused by a post if they ignore a judge's order to remove it. By Wednesday, six of the court's 11 judges had ruled in favor of higher accountability, meaning sites should monitor content and remove problematic posts on their own initiative, without court intervention. One judge has voted against tougher regulation, and three have yet to express an opinion. Alexandre de Moraes, one of 11 judges of the court, has repeatedly clashed with X owner Elon Musk and various right-wing personalities over social media posts. The review is taking place in parallel with the Supreme Court trial of far-right former president Jair Bolsonaro, who is alleged to have collaborated on a coup plot to remain in power after his 2022 election defeat. Prosecutors say Bolsonaro's followers used social media to lie about the reliability of the electoral system and plot the downfall of successor Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Last year, Moraes blocked X for 40 days for failing to comply with a series of court orders against online disinformation. He had previously ordered X to suspend the accounts of several Bolsonaro supporters. Musk and other critics say Moraes is stifling free speech, and US President Donald Trump's administration is weighing sanctions against the judge, whom Bolsonaro accuses of judicial "persecution." Lula, who emerged the victor in a tightly-fought election against Bolsonaro in 2022, is advocating for "accelerating regulation" of online platforms. ffb/ll/dga/mlr/des
