Support for gay marriage is declining in America
From the July 5th 2025 edition
Discover stories from this section and more in the list of contents
⇒Explore the edition
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
How Scottish schools are stalling over single-sex toilets despite Supreme Court ruling
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... It seems there is a large swathe of Scottish civil society that is unable, or unwilling, to accept that the Supreme Court is the highest court in the land. It is the final court of appeal for civil cases in the UK and its word is the law. The judgment on sex and gender, passed down nearly three months ago on April 16, could not be clearer – the terms 'man', 'woman' and 'sex' in the 2010 Equality Act refer to biological sex. Every organisation in Britain, from devolved governments to schools, was advised to revisit their equalities policies in light of the judgment, but it seems the Church of Scotland, and now Edinburgh City Council, know better. Earlier this week, the Kirk had to admit it was wrong to insist that biological men could still share female lavatories with girls, based on the partisan and erroneous advice of an LGBT charity and a London-based lawyer. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad A concerned mother from Fife had complained that her 11-year-old daughter had to share the female toilets at a church-run community centre with a biological male, only to be told by church officials that it was 'lawful and often appropriate' for 'women-only spaces to include trans women'. On Monday night, the church backtracked, saying it 'supported the right' of women and girls to access single-sex spaces, and suggested trans people should be provided with gender-neutral facilities. Members of For Women Scotland celebrate the Supreme Court ruling that the word 'woman' the 2010 Equality Act refers to a biological woman (Picture: Lucy North) | PA 'Widespread misinformation' On Tuesday, the Prime Minister no less, took time away from his troubles to say that he not only accepted the Supreme Court's ruling, he welcomed it, and he insisted that all public bodies must comply with it. 'All guidance of whatever kind needs to be consistent with the ruling and we need to get to that position as soon as possible,' he said. Dr Lesley Sawers, of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), followed up with a warning to the Scottish Government and other public service providers that they had a responsibility to ensure compliance with equalities law and that the current 'climate of uncertainty and widespread misinformation serves nobody'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad And yet teenage girls in at least one of Edinburgh's secondary schools are still being forced to share toilet facilities with their male peers. Pupils at James Gillespie's High School in Marchmont have to share a mixed-sex toilet block, with cubicles arranged facing each other in an open plan space. Parents tell of their daughters waiting until they get home before using the bathroom to avoid the embarrassment of sharing an intimate space with boys. A promise made last year by the headteacher to build privacy walls to separate the toilets has yet to be fulfilled. In his latest report to the school's parent council, dated June 4, he agreed that 'more work needs to be done regarding toilets' but insisted it will take a 'whole school approach to try and minimise the challenges we have in these areas'. He added: 'We are still pursuing the installation of privacy walls beside the toilets as shared previously.' While he and his team 'pursue' the building of a couple of walls, a QR code has been displayed in the toilets so that pupils can report any incidents of bullying – a move which I am sure is of great comfort to any girl who has to deal with menstruation with only a flimsy door, which doesn't even reach to the ceiling, separating her from a crowd of teenage boys. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Edinburgh to ignore Court of Session? But surely Edinburgh City Council, responsible for the management of the city's schools, has updated its advice to schools following the Supreme Court ruling? It may have ignored the Court of Session's landmark ruling, also in April, regarding Borders Council – when the court decreed that all Scottish schools must provide single-sex toilets, based on regulations passed nearly 50 years ago – but not even Edinburgh is going to ignore the highest court in the land, is it? It appears it might. Earlier this week, a council spokesperson said: 'We're continuing to consider the implications of the Supreme Court judgment and the Court of Session declarator, along with the interim update on the practical implications issued by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. We look forward to receiving the updated code of practice from EHRC and UK Government which will inform what changes, if any, we need to make to council facilities, policies and procedures.' What part of the law does the city council not understand? The 1967 School Premises (General Requirements and Standards) (Scotland) Regulations state that '… in every school which is not designed exclusively for girls half the accommodation [number of toilets] shall be for boys'. Or are council officials confused by the Court of Session's ruling that mixed-sex schools must have single-sex toilets? Could it be the city council, like the Church of Scotland, prefers to heed the advice of partisan campaigners rather than the law of the land? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'Couldn't be clearer' A spokesperson for campaign group For Women Scotland, who took the historic case to the Supreme Court, was baffled by the council's response. She said: 'We are bewildered that schools are struggling with the implications of the Supreme Court ruling – and also the judicial review regarding Borders Council. 'It couldn't be clearer: schools must act now to protect children and ensure safeguards are robust. We have been telling schools in Edinburgh, including Gillespie's, that they must act for months now. Waiting for the EHRC's code of practice won't change a thing and it is unconscionable that, in the interim, girls are needlessly being exposed to harm.'
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
US judge clears path for eight immigrants to be deported to South Sudan
Eight migrants lost their last-ditch effort to halt their deportation to South Sudan by the Trump administration on Friday, clearing the way for their imminent transfer after a judge in Massachusetts denied their request. Lawyers for the justice department said the men were scheduled to be flown to South Sudan on Friday at 7pm Eastern Time after two courts considered the request on an emergency basis on 4 July, when courts were otherwise closed for the Independence Day holiday. Lawyers for the migrants had filed new claims in Washington late on Thursday after the supreme court clarified that a judge in Massachusetts could no longer require the US Department of Homeland Security to hold them. District judge Randolph Moss in Washington paused the deportation briefly on Friday afternoon but sent the case back to US district judge Brian Murphy in Boston. Murphy said the supreme court order required him to deny their bid, saying their claims that deportation was being used as a form of punishment were 'substantially similar' to the ones he had ruled on previously. The order was the latest round in the fight over the legality of the Trump administration's campaign to deter immigration through high-profile deportations to countries where migrants say they face safety concerns, and which has already gone from lower courts to the supreme court twice. The eight men awaiting deportation are from countries including Vietnam, South Korea, Mexico, Laos, Cuba and Myanmar. Just one is from South Sudan. All have been convicted of serious crimes, which the Trump administration has emphasized in justifying their banishment. Many had either finished or were close to finishing serving sentences, and had 'orders of removal' directing them to leave the US. A lawyer for the men have said they could 'face perilous conditions' upon arriving in the country. South Sudan is enmeshed in civil war, and the US government advises no one should travel there before making their own funeral arrangements. The administration has been trying to deport the immigrants for weeks. The government flew them to the US naval base in Djibouti but couldn't move them further because Murphy had ruled no immigrant could be sent to a new country without a chance to have a court hearing. Jennie Pasquarella, a lawyer with the Seattle Clemency Project who represents the migrants, called the ruling disappointing. 'Both courts' decisions today have denied them their opportunity to have these claims heard and to protect their own lives,' she said. 'That is what is so tragic about where we came out.'
South Wales Guardian
5 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Trump signs tax and spending cut bill at White House July 4 picnic
Flanked by Republican legislators and members of his cabinet, Mr Trump signed the multi-trillion dollar legislation outside the White House, and then banged down the gavel that house speaker Mike Johnson gifted him that was used during the bill's final passage on Thursday. Against odds that at times seemed improbable, Mr Trump achieved his goal of celebrating a historic and divisive legislative victory in time for the nation's birthday. Fighter jets and a stealth bomber streaked through the sky over the annual White House Fourth of July picnic as Mr Trump and first lady Melania Trump stepped out onto the White House balcony. 'America's winning, winning, winning like never before,' Mr Trump said, noting last month's bombing campaign against Iran's nuclear programme, which he said the flyover was meant to honour. 'Promises made, promises kept and we've kept them.' The White House was hung with red, white and blue bunting for the regular Fourth of July festivities. The United States Marine Band played patriotic marches — and, in a typical Trumpian touch, tunes by 1980s pop icons Chaka Khan and Huey Lewis. The two separate flyovers bookended Mr Trump's appearance and the band playing the national anthem. Democrats assailed the package as a giveaway to the rich that will rob millions more lower-income people of their health insurance, food assistance and financial stability. 'I never thought that I'd be on the House floor saying that this is a crime scene,' Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York said during a record-breaking speech that delayed the bill's passage by eight-plus hours. 'It's a crime scene, going after the health, and the safety, and the well-being of the American people.' The legislation extends Mr Trump's 2017 multitrillion-dollar tax cuts and cuts Medicaid and food stamps by 1.2 trillion dollars. It provides for a massive increase in immigration enforcement. Congress' non-partisan scorekeeper projects that nearly 12 million more people will lose health insurance under the law. The legislation passed the House on a largely party-line vote on Thursday. It passed by a single vote in the Senate, where North Carolina Republican Thom Tillis announced he would not run for re-election after incurring Mr Trump's wrath in opposing it. Vice president JD Vance had to cast the tie-breaking vote. The legislation amounts to a repudiation of the agendas of the past two Democratic presidents, Barack Obama and Joe Biden, in rolling back Mr Obama's Medicaid expansion under his signature health law and Mr Biden's tax credits for renewable energy. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the package will add 3.3 trillion dollars to the deficit over the decade and 11.8 million more people will go without health coverage. Mr Trump exulted in his political victory on Thursday night in Iowa, where he attended a kick-off of events celebrating the country's 250th birthday next year. 'I want to thank Republican congressmen and women, because what they did is incredible,' he said. The president complained that Democrats voted against the bill because 'they hate Trump — but I hate them, too'. The package is certain to be a flashpoint in next year's mid-term elections, and Democrats are making ambitious plans for rallies, voter registration drives, attack ads, bus tours and even a multi-day vigil, all intended to highlight the most controversial elements. Upon his return to Washington early Friday, Mr Trump described the package as 'very popular' though polling suggests that public opinion is mixed at best.
