Tuesday 9th March - could be a big day

And the thing is, even if the ONs lose the damage will be done. The census has lost credibility and Im not sure if it can get it back. Perhaps in years to come this census will just need to be written off?

@Xanthangum thank you!

I'm still struggling to get my head around this, the magnitude.

So the sex question has lost its integrity, which has the same knock-on effect to the sexual orientation question, and the gender identity question isn't worth the paper it's written on, as those who apparently have one, are saying they won't be filling it out.

So that's three protected characteristics which are not being catered for accurately in the national census.

And if stonewall are behind it, then it's all because of an organisation purporting to support them!

I really hope that the judge gets to drill down into why there was a change of heart, and where it came from.

And who it benefits? Because it's certainly not trans people.

You have to question someone's basic intelligence if they think sex is a difficult 'concept' to define.

There was a lot of surprise in the Keira Bell case over the lack of follow up etc. The judges also seemed surprised at the MOJ’s lack of stats. I am seeing a theme here.

Sophocles no clinics, no research, no specific healthcare services, no community support, no refuges. No representation, no special treatment. No need for millions spent for just 0.008% of the population.

Judge "I'm having difficulty understanding"

that's 'cos it's all bobbins!

Go, on who else sniggered when they read that comment from the Judge

I also snorted tea down my nose when the learned judge expressed "surprise" . . .

Judgment at 2pm. Shit. Is it too early for a bracing gin?

I suppose more pertinently for transactivists, most of whom care not a fig for women’s services, when the 2021 census shows that there are only 5000 trans people in the UK, how do you think funding gender identity clinics will go? There aren’t any trans people, census says so. No clinics required.

Frustratingly daft.

Link to Fair Cop's twitter about the case, including a link to the first judgment here (because I needed a reminder of the detail!): twitter.com/WeAreFairCop/status/1369191039806836736

Going to ask the obvious here...

If Census is meant to be 25th March or nearest possible date to that, what stops the Judge deciding:

1. To ask ONS to take down survey until decision made
2. To declare all responses filed so far invalid - and ensure via wide publicity in press that these people refill in the Census once live again
3. To put back up once decision made - say a few days before 25th March and allow those who aren't around to fill in within the following weeks....or longer if needed (but I imagine that is a tiny handful - in hospital, etc)

Thanks !

What are the TA's trying to gain by doing this? There is zero benefit and 100% harm to them and others by not allowing the correct collection of data.

What an UTTERLY BRILLIANT thread - huge huge thanks for all who've posted and loving the humour - judge speak is great!

On edge of my seat until 2 pm

Which Court is Harry's case in? Is it 71, 73 or 76?

These interim applications are always hard to win as it is quite a big decision to take - to order something immediately so you have to balance the pros and cons and hard done against good done by acting quickly. I have done a few of them.

Interesting case. Let us see what the judge decides at 2pm.

Presumably it is dead easy on line to change the guidance later today which most people will not have read yet and not cost much and even if those who have already filled it in on the basis of incorrect guidance feel a bit miffed less damage is done by that than not changing it. Also people answering M or F would not go to the guidance anyway - they would just tick the box as they have done since the 1841 English census.

I am hoping that the Judge has sussed that there has been a bit of jiggery pokery (legal term) with regards to publishing before they needed to, and the backtracking. Even if the case is lost, I am assuming the Judge will rap some fingers

On this day of all days - and tomorrow's no better. But talk about a siren call - this thread is invaluable.

Necessary, um I don't think there any arguments for the ONS never mind better ones, the best the Barrister could have done was to have advised the ONS to apologise for the confusion and revert back to the original guidance.

Sorry not to derail, but could someone possibly link me to a thread/article about what Hellen/Glinner are giving evidence on (or a brief description of it, or even point me up thread if it’s been covered!)