Stonewall at it again - no legal sense

[IslandsAround]

on LinkedIn Stonewall posted the following nonsense -

The FA and Scottish FA have announced they are banning transgender women from women’s football, following the Supreme Court ruling.

It's important to remember that the ruling hasn’t gone through the parliamentary process yet and organisations should wait to see how statutory guidance is changed before making policy changes.

These announcements will be deeply upsetting for trans people, especially when they’re made with no clear plan for how they’ll still be included, and treated with dignity and respect.

Sport should be a place that is safe for all and where everyone feels welcome. Through our #RainbowLaces campaign, we know just how vital inclusion is.

Their total lack of basic legal comprehension is bonkers

What parliamentary process? Do they realise this is a clarification of a law that parliament passed 15 years ago?

How can they not see the irony in “safe for all?”

They are bonkers. Luckily, no business, insurance company or legal advisors worth anything are stupid enough to keep listening to stonewall.

I think they think it’s a new law, or that they need to wait for new guidance before implementing it. Guidance is coming, but it’s clear what it will be and people need to start following the law so the changes are starting. Stonewall don’t understand the law; that’s what caused all this in the first place.

THIS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE, AND IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A SUBSTITUTE FOR LEGAL COUNSEL ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER

Never forget.

My mind is just blown at the absolute stupidity. I know, it's Stonewall, but I thought they at least had a firm grasp of the lobbying and law-making process, if not of the actual law itself.

The EHRC will shortly open a consultation on a new Code of Practice (based on the SC judgment) and then once they finish work on the Code of Practice, it will be approved by Ministers and published. I'm not sure if there will be a parliamentary vote. But the Code of Practice cannot contradict the SC judgment. The SC judgment is already the law.

I wonder if any Stonewall staff ever have a "Are we the baddies?" moment, if they stop to think that they are campaigning against women being allowed to play football without any males joining in.

I don’t believe it’s stupidity, sorry. This is part of the same pattern of behaviour that they’ve shown for the last 10 years: deceit, obfuscation, deliberate misinformation. Fortunately many more organisations are wise to this now.

I’m afraid that Stonewall understand the law very well, they campaigned for the removal of single sex exceptions from the Equality Act a few years ago - they are now just barefaced liars.

Anyone still using Stonewall for legal guidance deserves whatever they get.

I would actually like to see a legal cease and desist heading Stonewall's way now. They don't make the law, they don't understand the law but they continue to muddy the public's understanding of the law because their grift relies on it. I would dig for any legal action on this to force them to comply with the law as it is, not some magical fantasy law in their collective heads.

THIS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE, AND IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A SUBSTITUTE FOR LEGAL COUNSEL ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER.

I thought OminousFlute's post needed to be bigger.

@BundleBoogie yes,this is more Stonewall "ignore it and do what you like " nonsense that they have peddled for years. They are utterly shameless.

Akua Reindorf addressed this claim on X.

”No, Stonewall.
The judgment of the Supreme Court is the law.
It has immediate effect.
It is not optional.
…
the judgment of the Supreme Court not only has immediate effect, but is a declaration of what the law has been since the Equality Act came into force in 2010.”

I’ve seen a lot of transactivists wrongly advising others (on things like their employers telling them not to use the women’s loos) to remind their employers that the SC ruling isn’t the law yet.

I thought it was just wishful thinking on their part, but it makes sense why they would think that, given that Stonewall are actually pushing this message out there.

It’s so negligent of Stonewall, as their misinformation and terrible advice will end up getting lots of trans people disciplined at work on the basis Stonewall has told them they have legal rights they don’t have.

I really hope the media picks up on this.

But even leaving aside the ‘SC ruling requires parliamentary approval’ nonsense, the FA did not have to wait for the SC ruling to have sex segregated competition. The 2004 GRA makes this very clear.

What is suppose to have changed?

@Blackdow
They are bonkers. Luckily, no business, insurance company or legal advisors worth anything are stupid enough to keep listening to stonewall.
Except my NHS EDI trainers!

The Rainbow Laces campaign was always about foisting men into women's sports.

Agreed. And their charitable status should have been stripped from them long ago. The damage they have caused, and the public funds diverted to following their lies masquerading as legal advice, are immeasurable. What other charities have dedicated themselves to systematically, yet below the radar, removing rights from part of the population?

Unfortunately a lot of companies do listen and take their advice.

Stonewall are not misinformed either, they have for a long time now deliberately misrepresented the law.

I don't think that's true. It was started in 2013 to combat homophobia - there was no mention of trans at that time.
Homophobia was and is a big problem in football - there are no openly gay male players in the Premier League and homophobic abuse is rife on the terraces.

Then the T got welded on to the LGB...😠

Might this be why Stonewall think that there is still a process to go through before the ruling is law? Still wrong, and amazing that their lawyers have ok-ed this, but slightly more credible misunderstanding.

I know - like it’s word salad nonsense - and illegal with it