Why were Steven Whittle and Victoria McClod not allowed to intervene at the hearing?

[Kinsters]

I have searched and can see that they were refused permission to speak at the hearing but I can't find any reason why. I was wondering if anyone here knew?

From reading the good law project website it appears that no trans organisations wanted to talk at the hearing for fear of media backlash?! That seems a bit lame but ok, that's a reason.

I have no idea but I cannot imagine that either of them would’ve been able to come up with an argument magical enough to convince the Supreme Court justices that humans can change sex.

Of course (I suspect that's the real reason no organisations wanted to) but it would have been better, imo, if they'd been allowed to try.

This answer in another thread is excellent as an answer by
@MissScarletintheballroom

• No individual trans people were consulted in the Supreme Court decision because the role of the Supreme Court judges is to decide on matters of law. The Supreme Court judges are the people with the most sophisticated understanding of the law. That is why they are Supreme Court judges. Why would they consult people who know a lot less about the law than they do in order to make their decision? They are also supposed to be impartial in their decision making, so giving significant weight to the opinions of people who are neither experts in the law nor neutral in their point of view would run contrary to that principle.
• The interests of trans people (a tiny minority) were represented by the taxpayer funded Scottish government with support from Amnesty International. The interests of women (half the population) were represented by a tiny grass roots campaign group consisting of three middle aged Scottish women, with support from a small women's rights charity and an even smaller LGB rights charity. It was David vs Goliath, but the pro trans lobby was Goliath, not David.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womensrights/5318578-argument-with-younger-family-members?reply=143684412&utmcampaign=reply&utmmedium=share

1. because noone is allowed to ‘intervene’.
2. Because it wasn’t a public enquiry - it was a case involving For Women scotland and the Ministers for Scotland of which Whittle and McCloud were not parties and thus had no right to be present;
3. because the legal team representing the Ministers for Scotland did not choose to call them as expert witnesses

The Good Law Project team are village idiots whose lack of ability to win a single case means their comments on this are probably no more meaningful than my MiL’s opinions on current education practices.

I'm pretty sure that individuals weren't allowed to speak at the Supreme Court. And orgs that represent trans people decided not to get involved.

OP - you might want to read Peter Daly’s several threads on X.

If you're on X, Peter Daly wrote a good thread explaining.

https://x.com/peter_daly/status/1913250866712191404

I'm not on X anymore (ever since it stopped being twitter). Maybe I should download it.

I’m almost surprised S’Whittle didn’t just pull Press for Change out of mothballs as a work around!

Here you go Thread by @peter_daly on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App

Thank you so much @yourhairiswinterfire and @SionnachRuadh that was exactly what I was looking for. Alas, I think I will have to rejoin twitter.