... The problem is that when mandatory EDI statements mirror these institutional expectations, they risk colliding with the Equality Act 2010, which protects individuals from discrimination on the grounds of protected characteristics, including philosophical belief. Recent legal rulings confirm that certain viewpoints such as gender-critical beliefs about sex and gender, or “colour-blind” opposition to critical race theory, qualify for protection. Forcing a scholar to profess allegiance to an EDI policy that contradicts those beliefs could amount to indirect discrimination.
KCL shows the problem in microcosm. In 2024, barrister and human rights expert Akua Reindorf KC issued a legal opinion on the university’s promotion policy, which required academics to demonstrate their “support” for its EDI ambitions. She described the policy as “partisan and ideological in nature”, criticised its reliance on Stonewall-style training materials that contained “numerous incorrect or misleading assertions” about equality law, and warned that requiring allegiance to contested gender-identity theory placed gender-critical staff at a distinct disadvantage.
In 2025, AFFS’s report, University recruitment: EDI requirements causing free speech compliance failures, named KCL one of the “most egregious offenders”, noting that the institution had previously been warned about such practices and had “done nothing”. CAF has also since heard from academics about job interviews at the institution where they were asked: “What approach would you take to promote EDI?”
Yet the Reindorf opinion, along with repeated warnings from campaign groups about the misapplication of equality law, did not bring meaningful change. What appears different now is the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023, which requires universities to take “reasonably practicable steps” to protect lawful speech, adopt codes of practice on free expression, and actively promote academic freedom. ...
https://thecritic.co.uk/bye-bye-edi/
The article doesn't just focus on "the Reindorf opinion" but thought it would be of interest.
I was going to add it as a post to the court case but cant seem to find the thread (and of course earlier ones about free speech at universities)