'No Trans person was involved in Supreme Court FWS v Scottish Ministers'

[ArabellaScott]

I keep reading this! It's specious!

Once and for all

Amnesty intervened in the case, and was represented by a non-binary lawyer, Lui Asquith.

https://www.russell-cooke.co.uk/our-people/lui-asquith

'Acted for Amnesty International UK which intervened in the case of: For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC '

'Lui Asquith (pronouns they/them) is Director of Legal, Policy and Operations at Mermaids. Lui is a qualified lawyer, with a background in LGBTI activism. They moved to Mermaids over two years ago to focus on improving the lives of trans, non-binary and gender diverse young people on the front line.'

https://podcasts.apple.com/se/podcast/how-can-we-raise-the-bar-on-trans-rights-with-lui-asquith/id1068563276?i=1000506713109

https://www.russell-cooke.co.uk/news-and-insights/news/the-uk-supreme-court-hands-down-judgment-in-for-women-scotland-ltd-v-the-scottish-ministers

'Lui Asquith of Russell-Cooke LLP represented Amnesty International UK, which intervened in the case.'

Is it just that Lui Asquith is the wrong sort of trans person?

While there's money to be made out of committing to doomed-to- fail court cases, I should imagine there will always be a line of men queueing up to do it

It's quite possible some activists have noted that the sunlight is not helpful to their cause, and are doing stuff in the shadows, as Denton's had advised.

Yes, we already see how Stonewall are re-aranging the deckchairs now that that the old set has been rumbled.

An entryist takeover of Diversity Role Models, another UK charity, isn't it? Because the old brand is irretrievably sullied.

Like the impact statement of the government’s conversion bill having a link direct to Stonewall’s conversion ban campaign and fundraising page?

Entering a high-profile Supreme Court case as a named intervenor carries immense risk, including:Targetted press hostility and public harassment.Regulatory vulnerability, such as investigations by the Charity Commission.Severe financial strain or potential bankruptcy if proceedings draw out.

Which of course the public funded and fantastically wealthy activist charities and organisations like the NHS have ethically considered and been sensitive to when women are forced into court every five minutes to defend their actual, existing legal rights, such as to not have to take their clothes off to validate a man's inner self with their bodies. And have absolutely never strung out cases as long as possible with the aim of punishing the crap out of women and bankrupting them past being able to access justice.

How the fuck do writers of bollocks like this get their noses through doorways?

Non binary lawyer? Oh really yes.
How many men wake up in the morning really not wanting to be lumbered with the advantages men have, or hate how other men treat women, just don't want to become of those men, or any man?
How many women wake in the morning, sick and tired of period pain and other female physiology challenges, or fighting against sexist men, sorting out the kids in school and parents in care etc, just so don't want to be a woman anymore?
Imagine you can wish that all away and just pick the category you want off the shelf?
And this person will argue this should be the law, lol.