logo
DUP MP hits out over latest twist to Supreme Court gender ruling as Windsor Framework causes NI uncertainty

DUP MP hits out over latest twist to Supreme Court gender ruling as Windsor Framework causes NI uncertainty

Belfast Telegraph11 hours ago

The DUP MP spoke out after the commission said the ruling, which determined the legal definition of a woman was based on biological sex, would have applied in Northern Ireland if it was not for the Windsor Framework.
Instead, the matter will brought before the High Court in Belfast, which will likely take more than a year.
The Supreme Court judgement has implications for transgender people's access to single-sex spaces.
As the ruling relates to an interpretation of the Equality Act 2010, which does not apply in Northern Ireland, the Equality Commission has to assess how it may be interpreted here.
It believes the judgment will be 'highly persuasive' in Northern Ireland courts, but the situation is 'much more nuanced and complicated, and there is significant uncertainty due to our unique legal landscape,' chief commissioner Geraldine McGahey said.
Specifically, the Supreme Court did not consider Article 2 commitments under the Windsor Framework agreed between the UK and EU in 2023.
Article 2 underlines the Government's commitment to ensure that people in Northern Ireland do not lose equality and human rights contained in the Good Friday Agreement.
The agreement is underpinned by EU law, and under the Windsor Framework, aspects of EU law continue to apply to Northern Ireland.
Ms McGahey said much local equality legislation used words such as 'sex', 'men' and 'women' without providing 'comprehensive definitions'.
But Ms Lockhart said the Supreme Court judgment was a 'victory for the rights of women and girls', and it was 'deeply regrettable' that the commission's response 'appears to cast doubt on the implementation of this landmark decision'.
She continued: 'The suggestion that EU law should continue to dictate matters of such importance to women's rights in Northern Ireland is entirely unacceptable.
'Whether it be immigration policy, equality protections or indeed any other area, the Windsor Framework should not be seized upon to place the rights of local people in limbo. Article 2 is about 'no diminution of rights', yet the Equality Commission does not seem able to set out in plain terms which right was in place and has now supposedly been lost.
'The Government must act swiftly and decisively to make it absolutely clear that EU law is not binding in respect of the Supreme Court judgement and cannot stymie efforts to reassert and protect the hard-won rights of women and girls in our society.'
Scott Cuthbertson, of the Rainbow Project, said: 'We have worked hard to understand the ruling and communicate our view, and welcome that the Equality Commission has accepted that Article 2 of the Windsor Framework could have implications for how this judgment is read in Northern Ireland.
'We're working through the commission's paper, including its interim guidance for employees and service providers, and considering its implications for trans people as well as our next steps to defend their rights.'
Hundreds of trans rights activists descend on City Hall to protest Supreme Court ruling
The commission said it would ask the High Court in Belfast to issue a declaration to clarify key questions.
Given the unique legal landscape, the commission said it was possible 'sex' could be interpreted differently in Northern Ireland to how it was interpreted by the Supreme Court.
Ms McGahey said if it wasn't for Article 2 of the Windsor Framework, 'we would actually be saying very clearly that the Supreme Court judgment applies here in Northern Ireland'.
She added: 'That is why we're saying it's highly persuasive for our courts and tribunals here in Northern Ireland.
'Article 2 is about ensuring there's no diminution of rights that are protected or safeguarded within the Good Friday Agreement.'
Ms McGahey said there was a debate as to which rights were being referred to, civil rights or rights relating to gender discrimination.
Until the High Court process is completed, the commission can only issue 'interim guidance' to employers and service users.
One suggestion is for employers to consider universal shower and toilet facilities, consisting of self-contained lockable rooms that can be used by one person at a time, regardless of their gender.
The intention of this would be for these universal facilities to be designed 'so no one could infer a person's gender or sex simply because they were selected', thus avoiding risking 'outing' transgender people.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Rod Stewart branded ‘grotesque' amid support for Reform UK
Rod Stewart branded ‘grotesque' amid support for Reform UK

North Wales Chronicle

time2 hours ago

  • North Wales Chronicle

Rod Stewart branded ‘grotesque' amid support for Reform UK

In an interview with The Times, Sir Rod showed his support for Reform UK, sharing: 'I've read about (Sir Keir) Starmer cutting off the fishing in Scotland and giving it back to the EU. That hasn't made him popular. 'We're fed up with the Tories. We've got to give Farage a chance. He's coming across well. Nigel? What options have we got? 'Starmer's all about getting us out of Brexit and I don't know how he's going to do that. Still, the country will survive. It could be worse. We could be in the Gaza Strip.' A post shared by Sir Rod Stewart (@sirrodstewart) Sir Rod's comments come ahead of his Glastonbury Legends set on Sunday, June 29 and has sparked debate amongst his fans on social media. Taking to X, formerly Twitter, one fan of Sir Rod wrote: 'To agree that Farage needs a chance is grotesque.' Another comment on X read: 'Stupid thing to say' as a third wrote: 'Rod Stewart has come out for Farage? Oh mate.' One more X user said they disagree with Sir Rod's comments but still respect the singer: 'No not giving Farage a chance, but respect what Rod Stewart has done and his career.' A post shared by The Times and The Sunday Times (@thetimes) In the interview with The Times, Sir Rod admitted that his wealth ensures 'a lot of it doesn't really touch me'. Insisting that he is not out of touch, and expressed his support for Ukraine, criticising US President Donald Trump and Vice-President JD Vance for their treatment of Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky on his visit to the White House, and Gaza. Recommended Reading Rod Stewart says country should 'give Farage a chance' Sir Rod Stewart promises 'sexy' show for Glastonbury Rod Stewart says his 'days are numbered' amid health ... 'It's depressing, what's going on in the Gaza Strip,' he said. 'Netanyahu doesn't realise that this is what happened to his people under the Nazis: total annihilation. And Trump is going to turn the Gaza Strip into Miami?' Stewart said a prolonged bout of flu, which forced him to cancel five shows in the US, nearly forced him to withdraw from a Glastonbury appearance he described to ITV as his 'World Cup final'. He confirmed he will be joined at Glastonbury by former Faces bandmate Ronnie Wood, Simply Red's Mick Hucknall and Lulu, as well as performing the song Powderfinger by Saturday headliner Neil Young.

Ice arrests of US military veterans and their relatives are on the rise: ‘a country that I fought for'
Ice arrests of US military veterans and their relatives are on the rise: ‘a country that I fought for'

The Guardian

time2 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Ice arrests of US military veterans and their relatives are on the rise: ‘a country that I fought for'

The son of an American citizen and military veteran – but who has no citizenship to any country – was deported from the US to Jamaica in late May. Jermaine Thomas's deportation, recently reported on by the Austin Chronicle, is one of a growing number of immigration cases involving military service members' relatives or even veterans themselves who have been ensnared in the Trump administration's mass deportation program. As the Chronicle reported, Thomas was born on a US army base in Germany to an American citizen father, who was originally born in Jamaica and is now dead. Thomas does not have US, German or Jamaican citizenship – but Trump's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agency deported him anyway to Jamaica, a country in which he had never stepped foot. Thomas had spent two-and-a-half months incarcerated while waiting for an update on his case. He was previously at the center of a case brought before the US supreme court regarding his unique legal status. The federal government argued that Thomas – who had previously received a deportation order – was not a citizen simply because he was born on a US army base, and it used prior criminal convictions to buttress the case against him. He petitioned for a review of the order, but the supreme court denied him, finding his father 'did not meet the physical presence requirement of the [law] in force at the time of Thomas's birth'. From Jamaica, Thomas told the Chronicle: 'If you're in the US army, and the army deploys you somewhere, and you've gotta have your child over there – and your child makes a mistake after you pass away – and you put your life on the line for this country, are you going to be OK with them just kicking your child out of the country?' He added, in reference to his father: 'It was just Memorial Day [in late May]. Y'all are disrespecting his service and his legacy.' In recent months, US military veterans' family members have been increasingly detained by immigration officials, as the administration continues pressing for mass deportations. A US marine veteran, during an interview on CNN, said he felt 'betrayed' after immigration officials beat and arrested his father at a landscaping job. The arrested man had moved to the US from Mexico in the 1990s without documentation but was detained by Ice agents this month while doing landscaping work at a restaurant in Santa Ana, California. In another recent case, the wife of another Marine Corps veteran was detained by Ice despite still breastfeeding her three-month-old daughter. According to the Associated Press, the veteran's wife had been going through a process to obtain legal residency. The Trump administration has ramped up efforts to detain and deport people nationwide. During a May meeting, White House officials pressed Ice to increase its daily arrests to at least 3,000 people daily. That would result in 1 million people being arrested annually by Ice. Following the tense meeting, Ice officials have increased their enforcement operations, including by detaining an increasing number of people with no criminal record. Being undocumented is a civil infraction – not a crime. According to a recent Guardian analysis, as of mid-June, Ice data shows there were more than 11,700 people in immigration detention arrested by the agency despite no record of them being charged with or convicted of a crime. That represents a staggering 1,271% increase from data released on those in Ice detention immediately preceding the start of Trump's second term. In March, Ice officials arrested the daughter of a US veteran who had been fighting a legal battle regarding her status. Alma Bowman, 58, was taken into custody by Ice during a check-in at the Atlanta field office, despite her having lived in the US since she was 10 years old. Bowman was born in the Philippines during the Vietnam war, to a US navy service member from Illinois stationed there. She had lived in Georgia for almost 50 years. Her permanent residency was revoked following a minor criminal conviction from 20 years ago, leading her to continue a legal battle to obtain citizenship in the US. Previously, Bowman was detained by Ice at a troubled facility in Georgia, where non-consensual gynecological procedures were allegedly performed on detained women. In 2020, she had been a key witness for attorneys and journalists regarding the controversy. According to an interview with The Intercept from that year, Bowman said she had always thought she was a US citizen. In another recent case, a US army veteran and green-card holder left on his own to South Korea. His deportation order was due to charges related to drug possession and an issue with drug addiction after being wounded in combat in the 1980s, for which he earned the prestigious Purple Heart citation. 'I can't believe this is happening in America,' Sae Joon Park, who had held legal permanent residency, told National Public Radio. 'That blows me away – like, [it is] a country that I fought for.'

Donald Trump's plot to abolish major right as Supreme Court gives him more power
Donald Trump's plot to abolish major right as Supreme Court gives him more power

Daily Mirror

time2 hours ago

  • Daily Mirror

Donald Trump's plot to abolish major right as Supreme Court gives him more power

The US President wants to abolish a right enshrined in the US Constitution for 157 years - and now there's almost nobody who can stop him Donald Trump wants to abolish a major right people born in America have enjoyed for 157 years - and is enshrined in the US Constitution. He's taking his fight against 'birthright citizenship' all the way to the Supreme Court - and won a major victory last night. ‌ In a decision that hands him almost unlimited power to change American laws with a wave of his hand, Supreme Court justices ruled that individual federal judges would no longer be allowed to halt or block his executive orders - even if they're unconstitutional. ‌ It leaves just the Supremes themselves between him and whatever he wants to do. And the next thing on his list is birthright citizenship - an issue likely to come before the highest court in October. Here's what's at stake for Americans if that happens. What is birthright citizenship? Birthright citizenship is the rule that if you're born in the United States, you're a US citizen, regardless of your parents' immigration status. The practice goes back to soon after the Civil War, when Congress ratified the Constitution's 14th Amendment, in part to ensure that Black people, including former slaves, had citizenship. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States," the amendment states. ‌ Thirty years later, Wong Kim Ark, a man born in the US to Chinese parents, was refused re-entry into the U.S. after traveling overseas. His suit led to the Supreme Court explicitly ruling that the amendment gives citizenship to anyone born in the US, no matter their parents' legal status. It has been seen since then as an intrinsic part of US law, with only a handful of exceptions, such as for children born in the US to foreign diplomats. Because it's enshrined in the 14th amendment to the Constitution, it should require a congressional supermajority to change the rule - at least that's the theory. ‌ Why does Trump want to get rid of it? Republicans have long argued this leads to undocumented immigrants having "anchor babies" - a truly unpleasant term suggesting some people have children to make them harder to deport. And Trump himself has argued, baselessly, that the amendment was only ever intended to cover freed slaves, which ignores decades of caselaw and precedent. How is Trump trying to scrap it? Trump claims he can set it aside with an executive order - and he signed such an order almost immediately upon returning to the White House in January. ‌ Trump's executive order would deny citizenship to those born after February 19 whose parents are in the country illegally. It's part of the hardline immigration agenda of the president, who has called birthright citizenship a "magnet for illegal immigration." Trump and his supporters focus on one phrase in the amendment - "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" - saying it means the US can deny citizenship to babies born to women in the country illegally. ‌ What's the pushback been like? Some 22 states have brought lawsuits challenging the order, with one brought by Washington state, Arizona, Oregon and Illinois heard first in Seattle. "I've been on the bench for over four decades. I can't remember another case where the question presented was as clear as this one is," U.S. District Judge John Coughenour told a Justice Department attorney. "This is a blatantly unconstitutional order." ‌ In Greenbelt, Maryland, a Washington suburb, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman wrote that "the Supreme Court has resoundingly rejected and no court in the country has ever endorsed" Trump's interpretation of birthright citizenship. So is it still blocked? Briefly. The Supreme Court did not address the merits of Trump's bid to enforce his birthright citizenship executive order - yet. ‌ Instead, they were asked to rule on the principle of state and district judges blocking orders for the whole country - which the Supremes decided wasn't on, despite being a right enjoyed by judges for decades. "The Trump administration made a strategic decision, which I think quite clearly paid off, that they were going to challenge not the judges' decisions on the merits, but on the scope of relief," said Jessica Levinson, a Loyola Law School professor. Attorney General Pam Bondi told reporters at the White House that the administration is "very confident" that the high court will ultimately side with the administration on the merits of the case. ‌ What happens next? The justices kicked the cases challenging the birthright citizenship policy back down to the lower courts, where judges will have to decide how to tailor their orders to comply with the new ruling. The executive order remains blocked for at least 30 days, giving lower courts and the parties time to sort out the next steps. The Supreme Court's ruling leaves open the possibility that groups challenging the policy could still get nationwide relief through class-action lawsuits and seek certification as a nationwide class. Within hours after the ruling, two class-action suits had been filed in Maryland and New Hampshire seeking to block Trump's order. But obtaining nationwide relief through a class action is difficult as courts have put up hurdles to doing so over the years, said Suzette Malveaux, a Washington and Lee University law school professor. ‌ Get Donald Trump updates straight to your WhatsApp! As tension between the White House and Iran grows, the Mirror has launched its very own US Politics WhatsApp community where you'll get all the latest news from across the pond. We'll send you the latest breaking updates and exclusives all directly to your phone. Users must download or already have WhatsApp on their phones to join in. All you have to do to join is click on this link, select 'Join Chat' and you're in! We may also send you stories from other titles across the Reach group. We will also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose Exit group. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. 'It's not the case that a class action is a sort of easy, breezy way of getting around this problem of not having nationwide relief,' said Malveaux, who had urged the high court not to eliminate the nationwide injunctions. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who penned the court's dissenting opinion, urged the lower courts to 'act swiftly on such requests for relief and to adjudicate the cases as quickly as they can so as to enable this Court's prompt review" in cases 'challenging policies as blatantly unlawful and harmful as the Citizenship Order.' Opponents of Trump's order warned there would be a patchwork of polices across the states, leading to chaos and confusion without nationwide relief. 'Birthright citizenship has been settled constitutional law for more than a century," said Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Global Refuge, a nonprofit that supports refugees and migrants. 'By denying lower courts the ability to enforce that right uniformly, the Court has invited chaos, inequality, and fear.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store