High Court to hear judicial review claim from nonbinary US citizen over UK gender recognition law

[IwantToRetire]

A judicial review claim that argues the Government's failure to issue a nonbinary US citizen a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) breaches the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) is scheduled to be heard by the High Court on Wednesday (1 November).

Ryan Castellucci applied to be recognised as nonbinary through the Gender Recognition Act 2004 (GRA) in 2022 but is yet to have been issued a GRC.

The 2004 Act states that a person can apply for a GRC on the basis of having changed their gender under the law of an approved country or territory outside the UK.

Castellucci was born in California, which is on the approved list of territories, along with most US states.

They moved to the UK in 2019 and have sought to have their gender recognised through the 2004 Act, which does not include an explicit list of which genders can be accepted.

Castellucci believes that having a GRC which states their gender as nonbinary is the only way they can legally clarify their gender in this country.

However, the Minister for Women and Equalities argues that the GRA only permits applications for the grant of a GRC on a binary basis, namely male and female.

Castellucci argues that the Gender Recognition Panel (GRP) tasked with considering their application breached its statutory duty to issue a GRC in terms which record Castellucci's acquired gender as nonbinary.

More https://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/litigation-and-enforcement/400-litigation-news/55489-high-court-to-hear-judicial-review-claim-from-nonbinary-us-citizen-over-uk-gender-recognition-law

Yes, that pretty much explains it.

As to 'denying existence' (again).... if I identify as none of this drivel existing, will it go away and leave me alone?

'Butty', 'butty boy' and 'butty bach' used to be common in industrial South Wales. I believe 'butty' was used in other industrial areas in England

Linguistic note: it is in fact the origin of the American 'buddy', with an internal soft mutation, as in the USian pronunciation of 'duty' and 'beauty'. Those latter words retained the book spelling, but, being an informal working-class word, the former came to be spelled phonetically when written.

People from Paisley are called 'Buddies', believed to be a corruption of 'bodies'.

https://dsl.ac.uk/entry/snd/body

https://twitter.com/tribunaltweets/status/1719654884864073876

Tribunal tweets live tweeting

'GRpanel is not required to apply the domestic route requirements to an overseas applicant. Gender dysphoria, live-till-death - those are domestic requirements, don't apply to overseas route'

I did not know this!

'a foreign polygamous marriage can be recognised as valid otherwise - if not resident. This is recognition of a status under foreign law which can't be obtained under UK law'

Full thread:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1719654884864073876.html

Couldn't agree more. Amen

From tribunal tweets:

CB: A wide range of services are based on binary approach: prisons, schools etc. Supreme court said onorous to restructure things. We say an NB certification wouldn't require anything or to introduce NB markers in their systems. NB isn't a PC and failure to take NB into account

isn't discrimination bc NB isn't mentioned in equality act. A GRC which included NB would put NB under GRC protections. Recog of NB status wouldn't pose same problems in women's prisons as TW might. The NB person doesn't say they are women.

This argument contradicts RMW and other TRAs assertion (Jaguar Landrover) that NB is protected in EA.

The barrister for RC is also taking pains to separate EA from GRA.

I know there is a legal situation to be resolved here, which is what the tribunal is discussing and deciding on. But really, it is such self indulgent nonsense. This person is male, and recognisably such despite undergoing surgeries to alter their body. There is no third sex, there is no "neutral" or "combined" sex. There is no need for any individual to have their beliefs and feelings turned into a legal certificate. If they want a neutral or novel title, they can use one. If they want a name that isn't associated with either sex, or with both, then they can use one. And so on and so on.

Here's another US person who is trying to change UK law.

Yes.

The complaints documented in the report are predictably ludicrous. Some respondents bemoan the fact they can’t ‘come out’ as asexual at work, as if British employees are mandated to chunter on about their sex lives to management. Others whinge that when they’ve mentioned their lack of sexual interest to ‘healthcare providers’, asexuality was ‘not recognised as a type of sexual orientation’. Instead it ‘was treated as a disorder that needed to be fixed’. And while, on the one hand, the authors argue that asexuality ought not to be pathologised, with their other free hand, they note that 41.8 per cent of ace respondents ‘considered themselves to have mental-health issues, most commonly with anxiety or depression’.

'Hacker. Bot slayer. Ex-sysadmin. Bureaucramancer. Purveyor of technically sophisticated shitposts.'

How the complainant describes himself.

If he wants to waste many hundreds of thousands of pounds pursuing these monstrous vanity cases, is there really nothing to stop him?

https://github.com/ryancdotorg

ArthurbellaScott· Today 11:57

As a pedantic note, Glaswegians/West Coast of Scotland use 'buddy' sometimes.

And God forbid he's in the wrong seat...

Aye, pal, your seat's 57, this one's 47, ken?

"How dare you?! My name is Mirabelle-Albert!"

Don't call Glasgow men Ken, is my advice.

Does anyone know if any of the reciprocal countries recognise any genders in addition to M/F/non-binary?

'Hacker. Bot slayer. Ex-sysadmin. Bureaucramancer. Purveyor of technically sophisticated shitposts.'

Hahaha what a colossal knob.

Holland, it seems.

'we also say, UK has to recognise nonbinary status, for example if a Dutch person has it and had come before 2021, entitled to have it recognised in the UK'

From they/them’s crowdfunder:

The UK government claims that, by law, a person's legal sex must be either male or female. This is not supported by biology nor the lived experiences of non-binary people

Has biological science found a new magical third human sex?

Or should the Bureaucramancer shitposter stick to … shitposting?

I'm fascinated to know in what way it's not supported by biology.

Can we not raise a law that means that people who do not hold a British passport cannot challenge our laws?

Ryan's lived experience is mediated by the fact that Ryan is biologically male, and no doubt perceived as being so by anyone Ryan interacts with.

Absolutely.

It would appear that some people have enough time, and motivation to drill down into just about anything - laws, customs, protocols, organisations, absolutely anything in order to skewer it to their personal advantage. Even when, or perhaps especially when it's unutterably vacuous.

I'm sure someone creative could come up with an overarching law that would put an end to this. Applicable in all situations. Maybe among the same lines as a vexatious litigant.

@Ereshkigalangcleg
with their other free hand made me laugh immoderately.

I bet we'll have a legal attempt to recognise "asexuality" as a sexual orientation soon, as @ArthurbellaScott said.