Schools must provide single-sex toilets in Scotland
Lady Ross KC made the declaration after Sean Stratford and Leigh Hurley brought forward a judicial review over concerns around policy at Earlston Primary School, near Berwickshire.
It is a ruling that campaigners have warned could now set a precedent following a landmark Supreme Court judgement on the definition of a woman.
Judges determined the term woman in the 2010 Equality Act related only to biological sex - not a transgender individual with a gender recognition certificate (GRC).
It means government and public bodies are now considering a review of their policies, including on access to single-sex spaces.
Mr Stratford and Ms Hurley complained at the lack of single-sex spaces at the replacement school, where their eight-year-old son Ethan was a pupil.
The Berwickshire parents also feared their son would be reprimanded if he misgendered another pupil at the £16.6 million school.
The local authority had previously dismissed concerns, but on Wednesday morning Ruth Crawford KC accepted the terms of the declarator on behalf of the council.
READ MORE:
Maggie Chapman accuses Supreme Court of 'bigotry'
Ministers won't tell NHS Fife to settle tribunal over trans row
Analysis: Why the gender row is here to stay following Supreme Court ruling
Supreme Court ruling has significant and costly consequences for NHS Fife
That made it clear the policies at the school were unlawful, it is understood.
Ms Hurley told the Times newspaper that their son had been 'forced out' of the school.
She said: 'We felt we had no choice but to pull our child out of the school which left him devastated. As a parent, you have a right to choose where you send your children to school and ultimately we were forced out, because they were breaking the law.
'We're hoping that following this ruling, this nonsense will stop, adults pay attention and properly safeguard all children within a school setting.'
She also raised concerns about their three-year-old daughter potentially having to share communal bathrooms with boys once she joined the school.
It comes amid concerns that public bodies, including councils, hospitals and prisons, had misinterpreted equalities legislation, which led many to adopt self-ID policies.
For Women Scotland, who supported the parents, have warned that public institutions face more legal challenges while these policies continue.
Representing the parents, solicitor Rosie Walker said the Court of Session ruling was "undoubtably" the first of many.
READ MORE:
Law Society slams Chapman's Supreme Court 'bigotry' remark
Aberdonians hit out at Michael Gove's House of Lords title
Swinney: Supreme Court sex ruling provides new clarity
She told the Times: "The reality is that public bodies are subject to the Equality Act and they cannot outsource their responsibility to comply with it to campaigning bodies.'
On X, For Women Scotland said the Court of Session decision was "clear" for all schools in Scotland.
The Scottish Government has said it "accepts" the judgment of the Supreme Court and is set to meet with the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) on Thursday to determine next steps.
The EHRC will present an updated code of conduct this summer which could influence guidance issued by public bodies.
Meanwhile, Scottish First Minister John Swinney repeatedly refused to say whether he believed trans women were women during a press conference in Glasgow.
The First Minister told journalists on Wednesday: 'That issue has been settled by the Supreme Court.
'The Supreme Court has given us the basis of law for that to be the case and that's what I accept.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
32 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
What locals in Balloch think of Flamingo Land
A 10-year battle has raged over what this idyllic spot on one of the world's most storied waterways should come to look like in the future. An English leisure company called Flamingo Land specialising in leisure resorts has fought hard to build a hotel and log cabins and, ahem … a monorail here. The very notion of a leisure complex annexing one of the few remaining accessible spots on what the legendary Scottish naturalist, Tom Weir had called 'a lung for Glasgow' immediately seemed an anathema to the Scottish public and to those across the world who had experienced Loch Lomond's wild beauty. More than 155,000 signatures were collected expressing opposition to what they regarded as an environmental sacrilege. No other grassroots campaign had ever come anywhere near gathering so many responses. Read More Fake liberals wage war on Scotland's poorest and most vulnerable folk How new Pope and Catholic Church have mesmerised our Godless societies Pope Leo is the first American pontiff, but Trump should not celebrate It forced the developers and their partners, Scottish Enterprise and the Loch Lomond & The Trossachs National Park authority to retreat and re-consider an arrangement they'd all thought could be steered through with a minimum of public engagement and scrutiny. Along the way, a pattern of civic and private relationships has been exposed in which an exclusivity agreement with the developers was uncovered as well as a nexus of interlocking relationships in which undeclared interests and quiet land transfers have occurred. Featuring heavily throughout the saga has been the SNP's favoured weapon of mass obstruction: the redacted official document. The latest twists in a decade-long series of convulsions have occurred in the last few weeks. In May, the Scottish Government's Planning and Environmental Appeals Division intimated that the Reporter assigned to the case was minded to allow the appeal for the Flamingo Land development after it had been unanimously rejected by the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs Planning Authority last September Seasoned campaigners though, who had observed the behaviour of Scottish Enterprise and the tactics of the developers up close were wary of breaking open the champagne just yet. Scotland's planning laws allow developers unlimited scope for appeal while denying the same to community groups. It was inevitable that Flamingo Land bosses would return. Yet, there would be one more turn of the cards. It came when Jackie Baillie, the formidable Labour MSP for the area, succeeded in having the issue debated last Wednesday. The Scottish Government, fearing a vote it would lose, moved suddenly to re-call the plans. One local campaigner told me: 'When Jackie gets going on an issue she becomes a force of nature. It's clear she'd stacked enough votes among all opposition parties to cause the Government problems.' Loch Lomond plans (Image: Loch Lomond planning portal) In the Balloch House Inn, local people were keen to dismantle some of the mythology of this struggle for what they regard as the soul of their community. 'It now looks like the plans won't be going forward any time soon,' said Peter Broughan, long-time resident of this neighbourhood. 'And let's be honest: it would be insanity to do this before the 2026 election. It's not a vote winner. The problem of course is parity of planning. The developers can come back any time they want. Objectors can't.' Last week, Scotland's MSPs all received a clumsy letter from a lobbying firm acting on behalf of the developers. It attempted to dispel what it described as myths in the objectors' narrative. Within hours the decision to recall the plans was made: surely one of the fastest times on record a lobbyist's claims were dumped. The firm described as 'myth' that more than 155,000 people had objected to the Lomond Banks development. Here's what they claimed was the truth: 'While an online petition claimed to gather more than 155,000 signatures, these figures are not independently verifiable. In contrast, the official planning process received just 760 formal objections, a small number given the scale and reach of the project.' Local campaigner, Alannah Maurer is familiar with this type of claim and dismantles it. 'This is desperate stuff,' she said. 'It's a verifiable fact that 155,000 objected, whether by email or through an online portal platformed by the Scottish Green MSP Ross Greer. It shows the strength of feeling – and to an unprecedented extent – that the Scottish are opposed to the planning application. If the developer claims these figures are not independently verifiable, is he suggesting that our MSPs are misrepresenting figures in statements they have made in Parliament? 'Are they suggesting that 155,000 objections, including campaign groups representing 6,000 members are not to be considered? How arrogant and insidious.' Willie Hutchison, an engineer who has worked all over the world, said: 'Loch Lomond is an area of outstanding natural beauty and it is recognised both at home and internationally as such. Commercial real estate developments like the Flamingo Land proposal are utterly at odds with the objects of retaining an area of natural beauty. Their proposal comprising two hotels, restaurants, bars, shops, a brewery, over a hundred chalets, and a monorail tells you that. 'Las Vegas on the Loch may be a quip but in truth it reflects how such commercial developments are the antithesis of the natural environment. In my opinion, this is a Trojan Horse with more development to come. 'And why has this deal proceeded with such secrecy? What justifies a near ten-year 'exclusivity agreement'? Why can't people know what public land is being sold for? And how much is the running bill, including working hours spent by highly-paid public officials? Are we expected to believe that 10 years and huge public and private expense is all merely for this development?' Local resident, Elaine Telfer said: 'You wonder why Flamingo Land is so determined to keep fighting, and at what cost? Could it be a Land Grab, of a world famous prime location: the gateway to Loch Lomond? Looking at their financial position, from Companies House, they are asset-rich only, so who are their backers? From the first sod being cut to the opening of the resort will take something like seven years. The disruption caused is beyond comprehension.' Enter Peter Haining, the world-renowned Scottish rower who won three world Sculling titles. He is founding Director of the Scottish Institute of Sport and remains a globally-respected rowing coach. He was born in nearby Dumbarton and first honed his skills on this stretch of water as a member of the Loch Lomond Rowing Club. Mr Haining has been in quiet discussions with some local campaigners and politicians about a much more ambitious and sustainable project which would unlock the full cultural and economic potential of this historic region. 'The scope of what can be achieved here, without disturbing the natural beauty and the natural order of this place is vast,' he said. 'I'd propose a Loch Lomond watersports centre. And from that you could develop ideas around on what this area really needs. I'd like to expand it to the University of Loch Lomond which would provide a natural link in an educational chain which has Stirling at one end and Glasgow at the other. 'This place is a natural environment for providing degrees in a broad spectrum of environment specialisms, including energy conservation and the study of algae and solar energy. Loch Lomond and the surrounding lands are intrinsic to a true appreciation of both ancient and modern Scotland, stretching back to the Neolithic age. The heartbeat of Scotland can be felt here. 'Spain has benefitted greatly from the tens of thousands who visit to walk the ancient pilgrimage routes that lead to the tomb of St James in Santiago de Compostela. We have our own sacred highways around here which tell the story of how the first Christian monks came here and where St Columba walked and which helped give birth to western Christianity. The geographical and historical timelines around this part of Scotland are vast end endless. 'You could have a Gaelic-speaking centre and foster trades and skills in kilt-making, acrylics, fabric-dying. In commercial terms, you could attract investment from global partners owing to the opportunities in world-class fishing, fine dining and whisky. It would be a four-phase plan, fully costed and researched, starting with a watersports centre, the university and training camps for international rowers. 'America's Ivy League universities have vast alumni wealth under management and these places absolutely adore the Scottish Highlands and the west coast.' Peter Haining's vision is significantly more valid and purposeful than anything that the government agencies and their favoured business partners have produced in a decade of wasted endeavour.
The National
an hour ago
- The National
Anger as return of MV Caledonian Isles delayed again
The MV Caledonian Isles was due to finally return to the Ardrossan to Arran route last week after undergoing repairs since January last year. But after it had arrived in Ardrossan Harbour, CalMac announced on Thursday that last minute issues had been picked up during sea trials, meaning it would be delayed until at least Tuesday this week. However, the latest update is that the ferry will not be back in action until Saturday at the earliest because of a problem with the gearbox. It has left locals in Ardrossan furious, with dozens of campaigners planning to stage a protest over the ongoing problems with both the ferry and the harbour at Holyrood on Thursday. READ MORE: Kate Forbes asked to intervene in Ardrossan Harbour talks In a post on Facebook about the latest Caledonian Isles delay, the Save Ardrossan Harbour group said island communities had been left "stranded". The group said: "Enough is enough. "This is just the latest failure in a long line of letdowns caused by CMAL's aging fleet and chronic lack of forward planning. They've ordered ferries that don't fit key harbours and allowed the fleet to decline to a shameful state—leaving Scotland's island communities stranded, frustrated, and ignored. "To make matters worse, stalled negotiations with Peel Ports have gone nowhere. The situation is unacceptable and growing worse by the day." Members of the Save Ardrossan Harbour group and the Arran for Ardrossan Harbour campaign – which represent locals either side of the route – are due to gather at Holyrood to demand action is taken over the dilapidated harbour which has needed an upgrade for years. The MV Glen Sannox and its sister ship the MV Glen Rosa – which is due to come into service next year – are both too large to berth at Ardrossan. This has resulted in the Glen Sannox having to travel to Arran from Troon since January, which has added about 20 minutes onto each leg of the journey. READ MORE: SNP minister clashes with BBC Scotland host over Scottish independence The Glen Sannox is only about to carry out three daily return sailings to Arran from Troon compared to the five that are possible from Ardrossan. While the MV Alfred has been providing extra support when needed, its capacity is much smaller. There have been no ferries running from Ardrossan for five months, which has left businesses in the town concerned about their future. The Scottish Government promised seven years ago that Ardrossan would remain the main gateway to Arran and pledged to fund the multi-million-pound upgrade required to accommodate the new ferries. But the project was paused in 2023 amid concern over rising costs and disagreements over how the bill should be split between the three partners: Peel Ports, North Ayrshire Council and the Scottish Government. Communities on both sides of the Firth of Clyde are keen to see Ardrossan remain the gateway to Arran given many people in the town travel to the island for work, while Arran residents have medical appointments in Ardrossan. In February, Transport Secretary Fiona Hyslop revealed that money had been set aside to take Ardrossan Harbour into public ownership. But since then, campaigners have lost faith in the progress of negotiations since a meeting with CMAL, Transport Scotland, Peel Ports and CalMac. Wyllie Hume, chair of the Arran for Ardrossan Harbour group, told the Sunday National he had written directly to Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes to ask her to intervene in the negotiations, but the Scottish Government has said it is "wholly appropriate" CMAL leads the talks on ministers' behalf. The Save Ardrossan Harbour group post went on: "Are you happy with this situation? If not, it's time to act. "Join us in protest at the Scottish Parliament this Thursday, 19th June." The group says there will be a free bus running from Ardrossan at 9.30am which will leave Edinburgh later on at 3pm. CMAL and CalMac have been approached for comment.
NBC News
2 hours ago
- NBC News
Poll: Americans overwhelmingly want Trump to obey court rulings, but MAGA Republicans are split
The vast majority of American adults believe the Trump administration must comply with federal court orders, though the president's strongest supporters are split over the issue, according to a new NBC News Decision Desk Poll powered by SurveyMonkey. In the poll, 81% of U.S. adults say that if a federal court rules that an administration action is illegal, then the administration has to follow its ruling, while 19% say the administration can ignore the ruling and continue its action. But among people who consider themselves supporters of the MAGA movement, there's a sharper divide. According to the poll, supporters of President Donald Trump are split, 50%-50%, over whether he should comply with federal court orders. Democrats are almost unanimous on the issue, with 96% saying the administration has to follow court orders. Among independents, 87% say the administration must obey court orders, while 13% say Trump can ignore them. The issue of whether the White House can ignore rulings from federal courts has come to the fore as the administration carries out executive actions, including its deportation program, at rapid speed. White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller argued last month that 'Marxist judges' were conducting a 'judicial coup' by constraining the president's authority when a judge ordered the release of a Tufts University student in Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention. Several federal judges, meanwhile, have considered whether to hold executive branch officials in contempt for what one called "willful disregard" of judicial orders. The issue has also arisen in the high-profile case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. He was deported to an El Salvadoran prison in what the government initially called an " administrative error." The case rose to the Supreme Court, which ordered the Trump administration to "facilitate" his return. The Trump administration held out against pushing for that for nearly two months before Abrego Garcia was returned to the United States early this month to face federal charges alleging human smuggling. Views of the Supreme Court The poll found that 55% of Americans have favorable opinions of the Supreme Court, while 45% view it unfavorably. Republicans are more supportive of the court than Democrats: 75% view it favorably, compared with 34% with favorable views among Democrats. Yet one key finding is that Americans generally don't hold strong views of the Supreme Court right now: 11% have strongly favorable opinions, while 12% are strongly unfavorable. The large remainder rates the court "somewhat" favorably or unfavorably. The poll was conducted ahead of the Supreme Court's traditional season for its highest-profile rulings, and it has yet to rule this year on contentious cases like one concerning birthright citizenship, which could affect public opinion of the court. The court isn't expected to rule on the merits of whether Trump can end birthright citizenship, which has long been considered a clear right under the 14th Amendment, via executive order. Rather, the current case focuses on the power of judges to block presidential policies through nationwide injunctions. If the court rules in Trump's favor, district judges would be limited from using nationwide injunctions to temporarily block an administration policy. There have been at least 39 such rulings during Trump's second term. Trump said in an interview with NBC News' 'Meet the Press' last month that he has 'great respect' for the Supreme Court.
