Tuesday 9th March - could be a big day

Sir James now sets out ONS's defence.
Sex must be a matter of statutory interpretation.
The answer is only constrained only by what the respondent believes their sex to be. It is not related to what's on documents. /26

anyold Someone up thread suggested that a new leaflet would have to be sent out which is clearly not the case. I think, given that sex was already the way to go before February, the change back should be just as simple. Unless (conspiracy theory comin up) they had said sex not gender to waylay any court action????

I remain bewildered. If people fill in the sex question with their self identified sex and then choose not to complete the optional GI question (which some of mimmy’s followers have said) - they are literally erasing trans people from the data and will undermine the argument for trans specific services including the new GIDS clinics. Bizarre.

If it is the same Judge Swift as in the MoJ JR, then I am absolutely delighted.

It might be a stretch to get one's legal head around the extent and impact of regulatory capture de novo, bearing in mind that Judges are pretty keen on the law and would imagine that that should be the starting point for the MoJ and the ONS too.

But Swift has already had a crash course in obfuscation and the upside-down and the awful consequences of self-ID/ not capturing GRC data where biological sex is regarded as less important than gender identity.

Expressing 'Surprise' on the outside meanwhile thinking "Here we go again."

Judge: options open could be interim declaratory relief confirming sex = legal sex or to order removal of the words 'such as' and 'passport' from the existing guidance. /25

No one will have completed the census yet

Plenty have afaik

highame

Someone (purportedly a solicitor) is saying this which is clearly incorrect, basically a falsification. A clear conflation of sex and gender.

"If the question asks your sex on Census Day then responding with your sex at birth may clearly be wrong."

twitter.com/truesolicitor/status/1369245816729309191

Am going to shout this soon

No one will have completed the census yet...Sunday 21st March or as soon thereafter as possible. The only stuff that has gone out, is a general leaflet and the online access code. I can't see it being a massive issue to make the changes online and on any form requests and if they have to, then tough (as the judge has already pointed out)

ONS has never said that collecting sex data is not necessary because is can be imputed from the gender identity question. It is simply wrong to say this. /23

JC says correcting online guidance is simple. Gives example of how twitter account gave out wrong guidance and then the next day corrected it. Shows how easy it is to make corrections quickly. /24

Sure. Back now

Surely, just those who have already completed the census? I didn't get the guidance with my letter, it just pointed me to online.

But they don't know how many people have already read the guidance and will apply it - people aren't going to keep checking the guidance to see if it has changed before they submit, and we know this guidance has been widely talked about in the communities it will most impact.

This is not the full Judicial Review so we won’t hear all the arguments today. FPFW are seeking an interim order that the guidance is taken down pending the JR. The crux of their argument today is that the guidance may not correctly reflect the law so anyone following may be filling out the census in an unlawful way. I think this is a lower bar to reach than the full JR to have the guidance struck out completely. My thought would be that if the judge agrees that there is a reasonable chance that it can be argued the guidance is unlawful they will order it taken down. I think it can be argued that the risk to the integrity of the census of potentially unlawful guidance is worse than no guidance at all.

@AdHominemNonSequitur do you want to take over?

The stakes really are high aren't they - so if the ONS lose they will have mailshot every household in the UK to tell them the guidance has changed?
Surely, just those who have already completed the census? I didn't get the guidance with my letter, it just pointed me to online.

Defendant has claimed birth sex is not lost because can be imputed from answers on the gender identity question. We dispute this because GI question is voluntary and non-specific answers won't help deduce sex at birth. /22

This is the issue....mimmymum saying things without looking at accuracy. It's been the issue all along. on 21st March or as near as possible. The 9th March is not either of those things

If they change the rules people will have to go back and resubmit if they're answers would no longer be correct.

The stakes really are high aren't they - so if the ONS lose they will have mailshot every household in the UK to tell them the guidance has changed?

Legal sex = birth sex (for all but 6000 people). /21

JC says granting interim relief is better than keeping unlawful guidance in place because i) ONS will not be collecting the data its required to and people will be answering incorrectly ii) important data on birth sex gets lost. /20

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine I don't think completing it today would make any difference. It has to be information that is correct as per whatever the rules are on the 21st. If they change the rules people will have to go back and resubmit if they're answers would no longer be correct.

This is my understanding, I'm sure more knowledgeable people will correct me if I'm wrong!

JC now turns to request for interim relief (order to force ONS to remove guidance now pending full JR). It must be in the public interest. Claimant is not asking judge to stop the census. Just to remove unlawful guidance so it can proceed lawfully /19