Stonewall charity status under threat unless it respects trans ruling
Stonewall will be referred to the Charity Commission on Monday unless it withdraws 'wrong and dangerous' advice on the meaning of last month's Supreme Court ruling on women's rights.
Sex Matters, the women's rights group, say the controversial LGBT charity has encouraged 'organisations to act unlawfully' by suggesting they delay any changes to female facilities such as toilets and changing rooms.
On Thursday, Stonewall accused the Football Association of rushing into banning trans women, who are biologically male, from the female game.
And they said the Supreme Court's historic judgment – that the definition of a woman was based on biological sex – had not yet become law.
In a letter to Simon Blake, the chief executive of Stonewall, Sex Matters said the ruling meant it was law straight away, and said it would refer Stonewall to the Charity Commission unless the advice was withdrawn.
Maya Forstater, the chief executive of Sex Matters, wrote: 'Stonewall remains an influential institution, which has the legitimacy of charitable status.
'It should not be encouraging employers, service providers, sports governing bodies or individuals to ignore or flout the law.'
On Thursday, the FA decided to follow the Scottish FA in restricting the membership of women's teams to biological women.
Stonewall published a statement saying: 'The FA and Scottish FA's decision to ban trans women from women's football has been made too soon, before the implications of the Supreme Court's ruling have been worked through by lawyers and politicians or become law.
'This is widely acknowledged to be an incredibly complicated ruling and its wide-ranging impact is still being worked through by the legal fraternity.
'All organisations should be waiting to see how and in what way statutory guidance is changed, before making any changes to their policies.'
Ms Forstater warned in her letter that Sex Matters would write to the Charity Commission on Monday unless Stonewall retracted the statement 'by means of a public statement and an email to current and past members of the Stonewall Diversity Champions and other related schemes'.
She went on: 'This advice is wrong and dangerous. The Equality Act has been law since 2010, and the Sex Discrimination Act before that since 1975.
'Before the Supreme Court judgment, there was some uncertainty about how it interacts with the Gender Recognition Act 2004 in relation to the protected characteristics of sex and sexual orientation. This uncertainty has now been resolved by the Supreme Court.
'The judgment is comprehensive, but is not at all complicated…
'Employers, service providers, charities and other duty-bearers under the Act have an ongoing obligation to comply with all relevant laws. There is no justification for waiting, and no ambiguity about what must be done.
'No further commentary or guidance is required, and by telling organisations to wait before acting, Stonewall is encouraging them to act unlawfully.'
Ms Forstater claimed that Stonewall's actions were in direct contravention of its charitable objects, which are to promote human rights, promote equality and diversity, and promote the 'sound administration of law'.
'By telling organisations that the Supreme Court's ruling is not law and that they should wait for changes to the statutory guidance before complying, Stonewall is acting irresponsibly and in direct contravention of its charitable objects,' she said.
'Please act promptly to undo the damage caused by your irresponsible statement, insofar as is possible, by retracting it forthwith and publicising your retraction on all the same channels used to promote it.
'Please also replace the retracted statement with one that is clear and accurate, accompanied by a recommendation that all organisations act swiftly to come into compliance.'
Martina Navratilova, the nine-times Wimbledon singles champion, said: 'Stonewall is stonewalling the UK supreme court. Good to know they know the law so well.'
A spokesman for Stonewall said: 'We are taking time, and legal advice, to fully understand the implications of Supreme Court ruling and the EHRC's interim update and get 'clarity' on the next steps including the timeline of the consultation and on the parliamentary process for a new statutory code of practice.
'We are highlighting that organisations don't need to take any action yet, or change their policies, because no new statutory guidance has been issued. The widespread implications of the ruling are still being considered and there will be a consultation process and a subsequent parliamentary process before any changes to statutory guidance are issued.
'Once, and if, there is new statutory guidance, Stonewall will review its own materials to ensure they reflect the latest legal developments. Stonewall's guidance has always reflected the law.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
'Civil rights for everyone!' LGBTQ+ community holds massive rally in DC
'Civil rights for everyone!' LGBTQ+ community holds massive rally in DC DC is hosting WorldPride at a time when rights for the queer community are being threatened. Show Caption Hide Caption Jim Obergefell talks LGBTQ+ rights 10 years after Supreme Court ruling Jim Obergefell, the lead plaintiff in the Supreme Court case that legalized gay marriage nationwide, looks back on its impact 10 years later. WASHINGTON − A crowd of hundreds of protesters clad in the colors of the rainbow gathered Sunday at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial to protest what organizers describe as a "coordinated, systematic attack" on human rights. The rally, which will conclude with a march to the Capitol, is part of WorldPride 2025, a global festival held in different cities and countries every year that promotes LGBTQ+ visibility and awareness. The event is being hosted by DC's Capital Pride Alliance, celebrating 50 years of Pride in the nation's capital. June is Pride Month, which comes amid a seismic shift in federal policy as the Trump administration turns back the clock on diversity, equity and inclusion rights the queer community battled to attain. Organizers warn that decades of progress in all human rights are under siege. "Our fundamental freedoms − and our very democracy − are at risk," organizers say on the website promoting the rally and march. "And if we fail to recognize the urgency of this moment, we'll only have ourselves to blame. Resist the marginalization and persecution of people just for being who they are." The front of the Reflecting Pool at the Lincoln Memorial was packed with Pride flags and flags representing trans and bisexual communities. The many signs read 'Proud and Gay,' 'Trans rights are human rights' and 'Gender affirming care saved my life.' The rally and march, which come a day after a parade through city streets, will be followed by the WorldPride DC Street Festival and concert. WorldPride comes to DC: Queer community vows to be 'louder than ever' Kat Robinson, 34, an active service member, attended the rally and march to protest the Trump administration's move to force transgender troops out of the military. In the first days in office, Trump issued executive order barring anyone who is transgender from military service, setting a June 6 deadline for transgender troops to leave voluntarily. While she is not transgender, the 15-year veteran said she knows many transgender troops who faced the decision of whether to leave the military voluntarily or stay and fight. She said it is becoming harder to put on the uniform and "represent something I deeply disagree with. This is not why I enlisted.''I am enraged by what is happening Robinson said. 'The language in the executive order was despicable and it makes me sick to my stomach.' The activities took place Sunday under cloudy skies with scattered showers. Miranda Burmeister, 29, and Danielle Caldwell, 33, drove seven hours from Connecticut to Washington to celebrate Pride and their wedding pair, who run a day care and have three children, said the mood has been celebratory, though they noted that the Trump administration and its anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric and actions have cast a dark cloud over the event. But it was an urge to protest that brought them to the Lincoln Memorial on Sunday.'I wanted to fight back against the administration,' said Caldwell, a social said World Pride has been uplifting and inspiring.'It's nice to be around people who are like us and accepting,' she said. Many in the crowd wore ponchos and were holding umbrellas as they danced to pop songs − including Chappell Roan's 'Pink Pony Club."JC Cummings, an architect born and raised in Washington, has been attending the city's Pride festivals for decades. Cummings, 69, said this year's event is important because it provides hope and optimism in the face of 'attempted oppression.''It's almost as if we're partying while Rome is burning,' he said while holding a sign reading 'Civil rights for everyone!''We're thumbing our nose at (Trump)," he added. Several speakers addressed the crowd, including local organizers based in Washington and those who helped put on WorldPride. At one point, a video message from former Vice President Kamala Harris appeared on the large screens at the base of the Lincoln Memorial, bidding the crowd 'a happy WorldPride.''Pride is a celebration and it is also a statement − a statement about courage, about community and about determination,' Harris said.'In this moment as we gather with friends and allies across the world, let us be clear: No one should be made to fight on their own. We are all going through this together,' she said to an eruption of cheers. President Donald Trump marked his first day in office by signing an executive order to dimantle diversity, equity and inclusion practices. The transgender community has been a primary target of the ensuing directives. They incude moves to end gender-affirming care for minors, revive a ban on transgender people in the military, remove references to the community from the Stonewall National Monument website and direct that federal agencies recognize only two sexes, male and female − affecting the ability of transgender people to identify on items such as passports. The actions have led some corporate sponsors to end support of Pride parades and prompted safety concerns for LGBTQ+ people traveling internationally to the WorldPride festival. Trump's 'bullying': LGBTQ+ advocates decry President Trump's actions during Pride Month "WorldPride is occurring at a crucial time, bringing together voices from around the world to support the LGBTQ+ community's ongoing fight for equality, visibility, and justice," the organization says on its website. "We encourage everyone in our global community to participate in this historic moment. By showing up and supporting Pride events globally, the LGBTQ+ community will be visible, vigilant, and heard."
Boston Globe
5 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Southern Baptists to vote on effort to overturn same-sex marriage
Conservative Christian activists hope to build on their movement's success in overturning Roe v. Wade, the now-defunct Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion, in 2022, and to apply the legal and political strategies that proved effective for that victory. Public support for legal same-sex marriage remains high, with more than two-thirds of American adults supporting it. As with abortion, activists hope to gain political power despite their minority viewpoints. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'Christians are called to play the long game,' said Andrew T. Walker, an ethicist at a Southern Baptist seminary in Kentucky who wrote the resolution. He leads the Southern Baptist Convention's resolution committee, which coordinates proposals from Baptists around the country to be put for a vote at the annual meeting. Related : Advertisement 'There are burgeoning embryonic efforts being discussed at the legal-strategy level on how to begin to challenge Obergefell,' he said. 'How do we take the lessons from Roe that took 50 years? What is the legal strategy to overturn Obergefell at some point in the future?' Advertisement Activists are aware that their mission may take years. But the resolution calling for this concrete action shows 'a deepening of Southern Baptist thinking on this issue' and a recognition of the need for a long-term strategy similar to the one that ended a constitutional right to abortion, said R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He said 'there's a great deal of engagement' on this issue between Southern Baptist leaders and lawyers with the Alliance Defending Freedom, the Christian legal advocacy group that worked to overturn Roe. 'As in Roe, it is not just a matter of arguing for or against abortion,' he said. 'It is also the larger pattern in terms of constitutional interpretation.' Supporters of same-sex marriage celebrated outside the US Supreme Court following the ruling on same-sex marriage, on June 26, 2015. DOUG MILLS/NYT The Southern Baptist resolution, titled 'On Restoring Moral Clarity through God's Design for Gender, Marriage, and the Family,' reflects a movement within conservative Christianity to see that laws align with their set of Biblical values and a political commitment to pursue those goals. The resolution calls for overturning not just Obergefell, but also any laws and policies 'that defy God's design for marriage and family,' potentially including the Respect for Marriage Act, a law that former President Joe Biden signed in 2022 mandating federal recognition for same-sex marriages. The resolution also specifically calls for the restriction of commercial surrogacy. Related : Lawmakers have a duty 'to pass laws that reflect the truth of creation,' it says, 'and to oppose any law that denies or undermines what God has made plain through nature and Scripture.' The measure also reflects an alignment with other Republican goals, and calls for laws that would 'strengthen parental rights in education and healthcare, incentivize family formation in life-affirming ways, and ensure safety and fairness in female athletic competition.' Advertisement Couples waited to apply for marriage licenses at Cambridge City Hall on May 17, 2004. RUTH FREMSON/NYT To go into effect, the resolution needs to pass by simple majority vote. Organizers say it is widely expected to pass. Passing the measure could be used as evidence to prove to politicians that culturally unpopular positions have support. Public opinion on same-sex marriage shifted drastically over the past 30 years toward overwhelming support. Last summer during his presidential campaign, Donald Trump had the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman removed from the Republican Party platform. 'It now seems the case in many sectors of American society that same-sex marriage is just as American as baseball and apple pie,' Walker acknowledged. 'I understand the political will is probably minute or minuscule.' Related : Of the nine Supreme Court justices, only Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas have suggested that the court should reconsider Obergefell, which was decided by a 5-4 majority. Chief Justice John Roberts, now a swing vote, issued a strong dissent in the Obergefell ruling. In his concurring opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson, the case that overturned Roe, Thomas directly argued that the rationale the court used to negate a right to abortion should be used to overturn cases that established rights to same-sex marriage, consensual same-sex relations and contraception. Next month Mathew Staver, a Southern Baptist and the chair of the Liberty Counsel, a Christian legal group, plans to ask the Supreme Court to hear a case about Kim Davis, a former county clerk in Kentucky who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples in 2015. That request will directly ask the court to overturn Obergefell, he said. Staver has been trying for two decades to use the courts to stop same-sex marriage, ever since states began to legalize it in 2004. Advertisement Earlier this year his group worked with legislators in Idaho on the language of a resolution that passed the Idaho House of Representatives calling on the Supreme Court to reverse Obergefell. Republican lawmakers, at times drawing on certain Christian principles, introduced similar measures calling for Obergefell's reversal in states like Michigan, Montana and South Dakota, and partially passed them in North Dakota and Idaho. 'That begins to show a sentiment from legislative officials, and it just begins to build a momentum,' Staver said. And while efforts like the SBC measure and the resolutions in the states have been largely independent of each other, he said, 'that momentum results in more coordination' between ideologically aligned groups, which was effective in overturning Roe. The Southern Baptist Convention, a largely conservative network of churches, has taken a rightward turn in recent years, particularly on issues of marriage, family and sex. It has also struggled following revelations of widespread sexual abuse of women and children, and the mishandling of those allegations over decades. The annual meeting is often regarded as a bellwether for broader evangelical sentiment on various political and cultural issues, even though it technically represents the views of only the 10,000 or so members who typically attend and vote, not of all 13 million members. Last year, Southern Baptists voted to oppose the use of in vitro fertilization, passing a resolution that Walker and Mohler proposed as part of a push to advance the 'fetal personhood' movement. The vote greatly worried many other evangelicals who rely on fertility treatments to have children and who believe IVF is life-promoting. Advertisement In 2023, Southern Baptists decided to expel several churches with female pastors, including one of the denomination's largest and most prominent congregations. An attempt to further expand restrictions on women in church leadership gained traction in 2023 but did not pass a second required vote in 2024. That effort is expected to be revived this week. This article originally appeared in
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Trump's war against DEI isn't going so well in Virginia
Apparently when President Trump says 'illegal DEI,' he means lawful and common-sense efforts to integrate public schools. At least, that's the takeaway from the Department of Education's new investigation against Fairfax County Public Schools. Trump officials claim Fairfax County violated federal law when it adopted an admissions policy designed to 'change the demographic make up' of its most competitive high school. This theory, which equates integration with segregation, dates back to Barry Goldwater, who remarked in 1964 that 'the Constitution is color-blind … and so it is just as wrong to compel children to attend certain schools for the sake of so-called integration as for the sake of segregation.' It seems Trump agrees. Unfortunately for him, the Supreme Court does not. Just last year, the court declined to overturn a ruling for Fairfax County. As I explained at the time, that decision made sense. Even as the Supreme Court has shifted hard right, decades of conservative case law — including from Chief Justice John Roberts — condone racial goals such as diversity, equality and inclusion. The new investigation tracks Trump's disregard for courts and his tendency toward bluster over substance. But in important respects, it also exposes that Trump's war on DEI lacks any moral and legal basis. Some context is helpful. For decades, Black advocates sought to desegregate Thomas Jefferson High School, one of the nation's top-ranked public schools. As recently as 2012, the NAACP filed a civil rights complaint alleging that the school's admissions policies discriminated against African American and Hispanic students and students with disabilities. Things shifted in 2020. As racial justice protests erupted across the globe, local leaders grappled with the fact that in a county with roughly 100,000 Black residents, Thomas Jefferson High School admitted so few Black students that the number was too small to report. The state convened a task force to examine the causes of this ongoing exclusion at Thomas Jefferson and other Virginia schools. Following a series of hearings, the board revised the school's admissions process, eliminating a $100 application fee and a standardized testing requirement. Contrary to ongoing claims that the new policy compromised 'merit,' the board raised the minimum GPA for admission from 3.0 to 3.5 and added an honors course requirement. The new policy also implemented a holistic evaluation that included new 'experience factors,' such as whether the applicant qualified for reduced meals or is an English language learner. The updated process also ensured that each middle school receive a number of seats equal to 1.5 percent of its eighth-grade class. The school board resolved that '[t]he admission process must use only race-neutral methods that do not seek to achieve any specific racial or ethnic mix, balance or targets.' This means that admissions officials are not told the race, ethnicity, sex or name of any applicant. In Supreme Court parlance, the entire admissions process was 'colorblind.' The new process produced promising results. In its inaugural year, Thomas Jefferson High School received 1,000 more applicants than the prior cycle. This larger applicant pool also 'included markedly more low-income students, English-language learners, and girls than had prior classes at TJ.' Consistent with the heightened GPA requirement, the admitted class's mean GPA was higher than in the five preceding years. The new process also yielded greater racial diversity. Black students comprised 10 percent of the applicant pool and received nearly 8 percent of offers and Hispanic students comprised 11 percent of the applicant pool and received over 11 percent of offers. The overall percentage of Asian American students decreased from the preceding year, but Asian Americans continued to enjoy the highest percentage yield of all racial groups. And as the Fourth Circuit detailed, Asian American students from historically underrepresented middle schools 'saw a sixfold increase in offers, and the number of low-income Asian American admittees to TJ increased to 51 — from a mere one in 2020.' In short, Thomas Jefferson High School adopted a 'race-neutral' process to pursue a set of goals that included increasing Black and Hispanic representation. This is the precise type of practice the Trump administration denigrates as 'illegal DEI.' Efforts to promote racial diversity do constitute DEI. But they are far from illegal. In fact, Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard — the 2023 decision striking down Harvard University's formal consideration of applicant race — supports most of the DEI policies Trump now targets. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Roberts deemed Harvard's underlying goals as 'worthy' and 'commendable.' Justice Brett Kavanaugh made the point more directly; writing for himself, Kavanaugh noted that 'racial discrimination still occurs and the effects of past racial discrimination still persist' and that 'universities still can, of course, act to undo the effects of past discrimination in many permissible ways that do not involve classification by race.' The actions of the high school square with Kavanaugh's call for policies that attend to race but do not differentiate between individual students on this basis. This should short-circuit the Department of Education's investigation against Fairfax County. But it is unlikely to stall Trump's desire to outlaw integration. The Pacific Legal Foundation, which initiated the lawsuit against Fairfax County and remains a force on the right, wants to revive Goldwater's hostile approach to integration. Consider the following FAQ on Pacific Legal's website: 'schools may use or not use standardized tests, essays, interviews, or auditions, as long as their reasons for using or not using them are not racial.' By this logic, a high school could lawfully eliminate an admissions fee if motivated by public relations concerns, but it would be unlawful to take that same action if done to decrease racial barriers that exclude low-income Black and Hispanic students. Now consider higher education. Per Pacific Legal, Harvard University could eliminate admissions preferences for the children of alumni and wealthy donors if done to appease alumni pressure. But it would be unlawful for Harvard to take the same action if the goal is increasing the number of Asian American students or mitigate unearned racial preferences that flow to wealthy white applicants. The upshot is that affirmative efforts to reduce racial inequality — everything Trump dubs 'illegal DEI' — remain legal and morally just. So, at least for now, integration does not equate to segregation. Jonathan Feingold is an associate professor at Boston University School of Law. He is an expert in affirmative action, antidiscrimination law, education law, and critical race theory. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
