Supreme Court ruling places the Equality Act and the Gender Recognition Act in direct tension with one another - UN Experts

[IwantToRetire]

... While the ruling was limited to a question of statutory interpretation, the experts warned that it risks entrenching legal uncertainty and undermining the rights of transgender persons in all aspects of life, including education.

... it may be used to justify exclusionary policies that further stigmatise and marginalise an already vulnerable population, as well as human rights defenders working to protect and promote transgender rights. We are deeply concerned that the application of this judgment may lead to increased discrimination and exclusion of transgender women in various sectors, including the workplace, at a critical time when employers should be striving to foster and maintain inclusive environments for all employees.”

They also raised concerns about how interim guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission has interpreted the ruling, allowing – and in some cases requiring – organisations to exclude individuals from single-sex spaces based on biological sex. This could lead to situations where both trans women and trans men are barred from facilities aligned with their gender identity, or even excluded altogether, the experts warned. ...

Full report at https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/05/un-experts-warn-legal-uncertainty-and-rights-implications-following-uk

It's staggering how this UN report finds the SC ruling responsible for causing legal uncertainty and undermining the rights of transgender people. How? The opposite is in fact true in that the SC ruling has brought long awaited clarity and made clear that the Equality Act 2010 remains unchanged. I guess it was too much to expect that certain groups would ever respect this decision.

The report was authored by Graeme Reid

ishr.ch/latest-updates/graeme-reid-appointed-as-new-un-independent-expert-on-sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity/

Lots of words but it boils down to ‘there may be some women’s spaces were no men are allowed, we think that is a problem, but we won’t clearly say why this is a greater problem than allowing men in women’s spaces’.

I am so sick of the dishonesty of not spelling out clearly what they are advocating for.

They want men in women’s changing rooms, and men strip searching women. Why??

The GRA itself lists specific situations where people with a GRC either can or must be treated as their biological sex.

Perhaps the ‘UN experts’ (who I assume don’t include UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women, Reem Alsalem) haven’t read it.

The Supreme Court ruling simply confirmed that sex is recogmised in U.K. law. Its not their fault that legislation can’t actually change somebody’s sex.

Reem Alsalem says:
https://x.com/UNSRVAW/status/1912444568932409613?t=3tgar2PwK0AqzukdowGLsQ&s=19

I welcome this decision by the @UKSupremeCourt holding that the term "man" "woman" and"sex" in the Equality Act of 2010 refers to biological sex. It represents the triumph of reason and facts based deliberations and the return of common sense.

Congratulations to @ForWomenScot and all their allies that have supported them in their quest to uphold the rights of women to equality and non-discrimination

The ruling is a recognition that the erasure of the ordinary meaning of sex in law and in policies has rendered it impossible to upholding the protection #women, including lesbians on the basis of the characteristic of sex.

Beyond the UK, I hope other jurisdictions are paying attention to this groundbreaking ruling.

I regret to say that I hold the UN in utter contempt these days due to their stance on many issues (Reem Alsalem excepted, naturally).

'This could lead to situations where both trans women and trans men are barred from facilities aligned with their gender identity'

Well yes, that is the aim, so that single sex facilities can remain single sex.

Sorry but I read the title as un-experts, ie not experts. Which is how I am starting to view all these non experts of Amnesty International, Oxfam etc.

It's starting to become really creepy and unnerving how they can only see it through mens eyes with zero thought to how women might feel. It's now so blatant.

That's how I feel. Not once in any of their various statements have these groups even bothered to say how women are affected in all this. Are we not expected to have any consideration given for our human rights? It is sinister.

It seems to have been written by the UN’s LGBTQ person, so the slant is hardly surprising. Reem Alsalem their expert on VAWG takes a different approach of course.

I read the title as un-experts

Exactly

I dont see why the UN has to publish as though an official document from what is clearly a biased group of activists.

But you can bet this will be quoted endlessly.

Unlike Reem Alsalem's statement.

On one level it isn't a surprise, but worth noting the number and range of responses that are all from the slant that it isn't fair on trans people.

Not even a not towards of course women should be allowed the dignity and respect of single sex toilets.

“The Court was clear that it was not offering a cultural or political definition of womanhood. Yet, the ruling has far-reaching social consequences and places two existing laws – the Equality Act and the Gender Recognition Act – in direct tension with one another.”

In fact this is right.

Because the GRA should never have been part of the EA. A GRC is not a protected characteristic on the same basis as other PC. It is a choice.

And it is because the GRA / GRC impinges on the integrity of the protected characteristic of sex that the Supreme Court ruled that sex was and could only be biology. It couldn't be a certificate.

Which of course is why the EHRC has recommended that the GRA be "disapplied" from the EA.

And great as the ruling is, it is a shame that it now has the headlines, and not the recommendations of the EHRC that the Government can lose in all the TRA push back.

If the GRA was disapplied from the EA there would never be any confusion between actual sex and certified sex.

I find it so weird how supposedly intelligent people can't see what is so obvious to the rest of us.

Facilities aligned with their gender identity we don't have facilities based on gender identity - they're based on sex. What possible reason is there to segregate based on "gender identity"?

Boobies?

The UN, who appointed a LARPing man as women's 'champion'.

Well the obvious answer is to repeal the GRA, only a very small number of people have actually used it anyway so it shouldn’t cause too much upheaval.

undermining the rights of transgender persons in all aspects of life, including education.

How? People with the PC of GR are protected against discrimination in the provision of goods and services, just as they were before.

it may be used to justify exclusionary policies that further stigmatise and marginalise an already vulnerable population

thecritic.co.uk/neither-marginalised-abused-nor-vulnerable/

as well as human rights defenders working to protect and promote transgender rights.

So really worried about the gravy train ending then?

We are deeply concerned that the application of this judgment may lead to increased discrimination and exclusion of transgender women in various sectors, including the workplace

See above, PC of GR still protected against discrimination. Notice you're still all about the blokes there too, no stray 6" tall butch transmen today?

allowing – and in some cases requiring – organisations to exclude individuals from single-sex spaces based on biological sex

Yep, that's the law.

They also raised concerns about how interim guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission has interpreted the ruling, allowing – and in some cases requiring – organisations to exclude individuals from single-sex spaces based on biological sex.

That's not 'interpretation'. That's the ruling.

That's the whole point of it.

Well the cause is the GRA, it’s obvious it wouldn’t work for women and children.

undermining the rights of transgender persons in all aspects of life, including education.

it may be used to justify exclusionary policies that further stigmatise and marginalise an already vulnerable population

The GRA itself undermines female transgender persons by justifying exclusionary policies specifically aimed at female transgender persons.

The GRA is in conflict with every single law that attempts to treat all individuals equally.

'This could lead to situations where both trans women and trans men are barred from facilities aligned with their gender identity'

No could about it mate, that's exactly what it means will happen. The Utter Nutters must of hired him for his looks cos it sure wasn't for his brains. 🙄

How is this even in the UN's remit??!

Exactly.

This would be the mother ship of the very aptly named group 'unwomen', which has for years been a captured enthusiast of women's rights being for men, and women as a sex being too revolting to mention.

Not really an authority on objective common sense and ethics.

The UN is almost completely obsolete now isn’t it - unable to stop war in Europe, lost all credibility in the Middle East, jack shit on war in Africa, can’t keep climate change front and centre even when the results are already starkly obvious in some countries, and yet has time to pronounce on the ‘most vulnerable’ who, it turns out, aren’t women in Afghanistan or people being trafficked…..🙄

All respect to Reem Alsalem, I don’t know how she keeps going in the middle of this mess, but she manages to. For which I am very grateful

The experts are part of what is known as the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council. .....Special Procedures experts work on a voluntary basis; they are not UN staff and do not receive a salary for their work. They are independent from any government or organization and serve in their individual capacity.

I think that means that they are freelance busybodies just doing it for the love of scolding women🙄