Latest news with #EqualityCommission
The Independent
01-07-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Soccer ban sparks fears of widening trans exclusion in the UK
It was not her best goal or most important soccer match, but when the ball hit the back of the net in Natalie Washington 's debut on a women's team in 2017, she felt a sense of belonging that had been missing. It was long in coming: Washington had struggled to fit in on a men's team and eventually stopped playing when she decided to transition to being a woman and go through gender-affirming surgery. When she joined a women's team, she quickly felt accepted. Now, after the United Kingdom's highest court in April said that for anti-discrimination purposes the terms 'woman' and 'man' refer to biological sex, Washington's opportunity to play the sport she loves in the league she wants is in doubt. The head of the U.K's Equality and Human Rights Commission followed the ruling a day later by saying the court had provided clarity and that transgender women would be excluded from women-only spaces such as toilets, single-sex hospital wards and sports teams. The Football Association, the regulatory body for soccer in the U.K., followed up by banning transgender players from women's teams in England and Scotland, a ban that took effect at the start of June. 'It feels like things are being taken away from trans people on an almost daily basis," Washington said. 'It's another blow, another kick at a time when people are already hurting.' Long a divisive issue Beyond Britain, inclusion of trans players in sports has long been a divisive issue, with arguments primarily focused on whether it's fair to have athletes born as boys compete against girls and women. In the U.S., it has been particularly politicized, with most Republican-controlled states banning transgender athletes in girls' sports and President Donald Trump signing an executive order to prohibit participation of transgender athletes from girls' and women's sports. The U.K. court said trans people were still protected from discrimination under British law, such as in employment, housing and education, but the ruling means access to certain single-sex facilities could be curtailed. Trans rights groups condemned the decision, which is likely to have a profound effect for thousands. Out of some 66 million people in England, Scotland and Wales, about 116,000 identified as trans in the latest census count. The feminist groups who led the legal challenge cheered the ruling and others, including Prime Minister Keir Starmer, welcomed the clarity it brought. 'Everyone knows what sex is and you can't change it,' said Susan Smith, co-director of For Women Scotland, which brought the case. A difficult decision Washington, who leads the group Football v Transphobia, was one of 28 transgender women registered with the Football Association to play amateur soccer. In order to play the women's game, they had to have testosterone levels reduced to the range of biologically born females. After the ruling, the organization changed its rules, saying that although it had aimed to make soccer accessible to as many people as possible, it was always prepared to alter its policy if there were changes in the law or science. 'We understand that this will be difficult for people who simply want to play the game they love in the gender by which they identify,' the FA said, adding that it would contact transgender women currently playing to explain the changes and how they can remain involved. Some clubs have responded by finding ways around the ban. Goal Diggers FC, a women and nonbinary inclusive soccer club based in London, has withdrawn from all FA-affiliated leagues. On June 1, the day the ban took effect, Goal Diggers hosted an inclusive women's tournament in London, drawing more than 100 players in a show of solidarity. 'I'll always have a place here and I'll always be a trans woman,' said Billie Sky, a 28-year-old trans player for Goal Diggers. 'No one can take that away from me.' Other voices, other sports Groups that have campaigned to keep trans athletes from girls' and women's teams, citing a matter of safety and fairness, welcomed the move by the FA. 'The FA had ample evidence of the harms to women and girls caused by its nonsensical policy of letting men who identify as women play in women's teams,' said Fiona McAnena of Sex Matters. Groups that oversee cricket and netball, an offshoot of basketball that is played mainly by women, also limited women's competition to those who were assigned at birth as females. The England and Wales Cricket Board said transgender women and girls could continue playing in open and mixed cricket. England Netball said it would allow anyone to play in a new mixed category beginning in September. How the ruling came about The legal case involved a 2018 Scottish law requiring at least half of the seats on public boards to be held by women. Trans women with certificates recognizing their gender were to be included in meeting the quota. The court said that using the certificates to identify someone's gender clashes with the definitions of man and woman. Under the ruling, a transgender person could not claim they had been discriminated against if barred from a single-sex space. Alexander Maine, a senior lecturer at The City Law School specializing in gender, sexuality and law, said the ruling clouds the value of a document sanctioned by the U.K. Gender Recognition Act that allows them to later update their birth certificate reflecting their acquired gender. 'There may be a challenge at the European Court of Human Rights brought by trans individuals who say that there is a problem where they may be two sexes at once," Maine said. Someone could hold 'a gender recognition certificate stating that they are their acquired gender, whereas under the U.K. Equality Act, they are still recognized in their birth gender,' he said. Washington and many others say they worry the ruling may lead to more hatred aimed at trans people. 'For the first time in a long time, I felt scared about how people are going to react to me in public,' Washington said. 'I don't feel anymore that I can guarantee I have support to turn to from authorities.' ___ Brian Melley in London contributed to this report.
Associated Press
01-07-2025
- Politics
- Associated Press
Soccer ban sparks fears of widening trans exclusion in the UK
LONDON (AP) — It was not her best goal or most important soccer match, but when the ball hit the back of the net in Natalie Washington's debut on a women's team in 2017, she felt a sense of belonging that had been missing. It was long in coming: Washington had struggled to fit in on a men's team and eventually stopped playing when she decided to transition to being a woman and go through gender-affirming surgery. When she joined a women's team, she quickly felt accepted. Now, after the United Kingdom's highest court in April said that for anti-discrimination purposes the terms 'woman' and 'man' refer to biological sex, Washington's opportunity to play the sport she loves in the league she wants is in doubt. The head of the U.K's Equality and Human Rights Commission followed the ruling a day later by saying the court had provided clarity and that transgender women would be excluded from women-only spaces such as toilets, single-sex hospital wards and sports teams. The Football Association, the regulatory body for soccer in the U.K., followed up by banning transgender players from women's teams in England and Scotland, a ban that took effect at the start of June. 'It feels like things are being taken away from trans people on an almost daily basis,' Washington said. 'It's another blow, another kick at a time when people are already hurting.' Long a divisive issue Beyond Britain, inclusion of trans players in sports has long been a divisive issue, with arguments primarily focused on whether it's fair to have athletes born as boys compete against girls and women. In the U.S., it has been particularly politicized, with most Republican-controlled states banning transgender athletes in girls' sports and President Donald Trump signing an executive order to prohibit participation of transgender athletes from girls' and women's sports. The U.K. court said trans people were still protected from discrimination under British law, such as in employment, housing and education, but the ruling means access to certain single-sex facilities could be curtailed. Trans rights groups condemned the decision, which is likely to have a profound effect for thousands. Out of some 66 million people in England, Scotland and Wales, about 116,000 identified as trans in the latest census count. The feminist groups who led the legal challenge cheered the ruling and others, including Prime Minister Keir Starmer, welcomed the clarity it brought. 'Everyone knows what sex is and you can't change it,' said Susan Smith, co-director of For Women Scotland, which brought the case. A difficult decision Washington, who leads the group Football v Transphobia, was one of 28 transgender women registered with the Football Association to play amateur soccer. In order to play the women's game, they had to have testosterone levels reduced to the range of biologically born females. After the ruling, the organization changed its rules, saying that although it had aimed to make soccer accessible to as many people as possible, it was always prepared to alter its policy if there were changes in the law or science. 'We understand that this will be difficult for people who simply want to play the game they love in the gender by which they identify,' the FA said, adding that it would contact transgender women currently playing to explain the changes and how they can remain involved. Some clubs have responded by finding ways around the ban. Goal Diggers FC, a women and nonbinary inclusive soccer club based in London, has withdrawn from all FA-affiliated leagues. On June 1, the day the ban took effect, Goal Diggers hosted an inclusive women's tournament in London, drawing more than 100 players in a show of solidarity. 'I'll always have a place here and I'll always be a trans woman,' said Billie Sky, a 28-year-old trans player for Goal Diggers. 'No one can take that away from me.' Other voices, other sports Groups that have campaigned to keep trans athletes from girls' and women's teams, citing a matter of safety and fairness, welcomed the move by the FA. 'The FA had ample evidence of the harms to women and girls caused by its nonsensical policy of letting men who identify as women play in women's teams,' said Fiona McAnena of Sex Matters. Groups that oversee cricket and netball, an offshoot of basketball that is played mainly by women, also limited women's competition to those who were assigned at birth as females. The England and Wales Cricket Board said transgender women and girls could continue playing in open and mixed cricket. England Netball said it would allow anyone to play in a new mixed category beginning in September. How the ruling came about The legal case involved a 2018 Scottish law requiring at least half of the seats on public boards to be held by women. Trans women with certificates recognizing their gender were to be included in meeting the quota. The court said that using the certificates to identify someone's gender clashes with the definitions of man and woman. Under the ruling, a transgender person could not claim they had been discriminated against if barred from a single-sex space. Alexander Maine, a senior lecturer at The City Law School specializing in gender, sexuality and law, said the ruling clouds the value of a document sanctioned by the U.K. Gender Recognition Act that allows them to later update their birth certificate reflecting their acquired gender. 'There may be a challenge at the European Court of Human Rights brought by trans individuals who say that there is a problem where they may be two sexes at once,' Maine said. Someone could hold 'a gender recognition certificate stating that they are their acquired gender, whereas under the U.K. Equality Act, they are still recognized in their birth gender,' he said. Washington and many others say they worry the ruling may lead to more hatred aimed at trans people. 'For the first time in a long time, I felt scared about how people are going to react to me in public,' Washington said. 'I don't feel anymore that I can guarantee I have support to turn to from authorities.' ___ Brian Melley in London contributed to this report.
Times
29-06-2025
- Politics
- Times
Keir Starmer says ‘get on with it' as trans ruling ignored
Hospitals and government departments refusing to implement the Supreme Court ruling on the definition of a woman must 'get on with it', Sir Keir Starmer has said, as public bodies continue to defy the law. The prime minister said guidance on how to interpret the court's decision must be 'consistent with the ruling', after reports civil servants and some public bodies were attempting to ignore the judgment that the definition of a woman was to be based on biological sex. The prime minister told reporters he 'accepted the ruling; welcomed the ruling, and everything else flows from that as far as I'm concerned'. He said: 'All guidance of whatever kind needs to be consistent with the ruling and we need to get to that position as soon as possible.' Every organisation in Britain was told to revisit their equality policies after the country's highest court ruled that transgender women were not legally women in reference to the Equality Act in April. Trans+ Solidarity Alliance led a mass lobby of their MPs over the Equality and Human Rights Commission's 'bathroom ban' guidance ALISHA ABODUNDE/GETTY IMAGES However, The Times revealed last month that Whitehall was refusing to implement single-sex spaces in government departments until the equality regulator intervenes. Human resources and staff networks have advised civil servants that the policies remain in effect while they are under review, despite many advising that transgender people are able to use whichever facilities they feel most comfortable with. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is drawing up new guidance that will help public bodies and organisations implement the ruling. The regulator said the guidelines should only be seen as a tool to implement the law and the Supreme Court's judgment 'is effective immediately'. The Times also reported that hospital managers ignored official guidance and said that policies would not change until NHS England responded to the ruling. Maya Forstater, the chief executive of Sex Matters, said: 'This is an important intervention from the prime minister, given the huge number of public bodies failing to implement the Supreme Court judgment and operating outside the law. Political leadership is essential if women whose rights are being stolen are not to be forced to turn to the courts, where public bodies will end up losing, at great expense to taxpayers. 'It's no coincidence that the private sector has been faster to bring their policies in line with the judgment, recognising what is at stake for the bottom line. Meanwhile most NHS, university and civil service leaders are sitting on their hands. 'The law is clear and there is no need to wait for further guidance from the EHRC or anyone else. Unlike the small businesses and services for which the regulator's guidance is intended, public sector organisations have access to specialist legal advice, as well as extra statutory obligations under the public sector equality duty.'
Belfast Telegraph
28-06-2025
- Politics
- Belfast Telegraph
DUP MP hits out over latest twist to Supreme Court gender ruling as Windsor Framework causes NI uncertainty
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.
Belfast Telegraph
27-06-2025
- Politics
- Belfast Telegraph
DUP MLA hits out over latest twist to Supreme Court gender ruling as Windsor Framework causes NI uncertainty
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.' Hundreds of trans rights activists descend on City Hall to protest Supreme Court ruling 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.' 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.
