On Saturday 26th of April, crowds gathered in St Helens Square to protest the recent Supreme Court ruling and its implications for trans individuals. The Court unanimously ruled that in the Equality Act 2010, ‘sex’ means biological sex.
In an impressive show of solidarity, over 600 people attended the demonstration to support the trans community. Activists included families, students and members of York’s local queer community. They were in high spirits, singing “What’s Up?” by 4 Non Blondes and listening to speeches. Speakers recounted personal stories and shared wisdom to inspire the crowd. They also called on the York Central MP, Rachael Maskell, who attended the protest to make their voices heard.
The event’s organisers York LGBT Forum said: “Together, we are stronger. Together, we will continue to demand a world where trans, non-binary, and intersex people are celebrated, protected and free.”
“Biology is not Binary”
Protest Sign
York Vision spoke to an anonymous protester who explained why they attended the rally: “I think it’s very important to physically show your support to the trans community and demonstrate to those celebrating the ruling that this isn’t the victory they think it is. I think the amount of people here shows how many of us can see the danger of this ruling to such a marginalised group.”
Politicians have hailed this ruling as providing long-awaited clarity to a complex debate. Keir Starmer said the judgment finally declares that “a woman is an adult female”. However, trans people are left fearing the potential consequences of such a decision.
In a statement on the ruling, York LGBT Forum said: “We don’t yet know what the implications of the ruling will be in practice, but we do know it speaks to wider trends that we find hugely concerning: growing hostility towards queer and trans people, now also paired with the erosion of their legal protections.”
In fact, politicians deliberately avoiding this debate is what has inflated the importance of what was once a narrow legal judgement.
“Support your sisters not just your cis-ters”
Protest sign
The Supreme Court Ruling Explained
The role of the Supreme Court was solely to answer the question: what did Parliament mean by “sex” in 2010 when it passed the Equality Act?
The case began after an obscure Scottish law was passed in 2018 which aimed to get more women onto public boards. The law included trans women, however, the campaign group ‘For Women Scotland’ objected to their inclusion, claiming it contravened cis-women’s rights under the Equality Act.
What do the changes to the Equality Act do?
The Equality Act includes specific protections for women through job quotas, women’s only spaces and protections against sex-based discrimination. However, the ruling means that if you weren’t born biologically female, you don’t count as one under the law.
The Equality Act does have protections for trans individuals but activists have pointed out that it now effectively operates as a two-tier system. Under the ruling, transgender people can not be treated the same as cisgender people in all legal circumstances. Although trans people want to be recognised as their true gender, under this Act they are now treated differently.
Notably, the ruling has also excluded trans people with Gender Recognition Certificates (GRCs). GRCs aim to legally affirm the gender of those who have transitioned, leaving activists to question their purpose if they don’t establish the holder’s identity in law.
On the other hand, the Court justified its ruling by saying that its position avoided creating a distinction between trans people with and without certificates.
The role of the court
While announcing the ruling Judge Lord Hodge clearly explained that it wasn’t the court’s role to make policy but to ascertain the meaning of the existing legislation. He explicitly stated: “We counsel against reading this judgement as a triumph of one or more groups in our society at the expense of another, it is not.”
However, the effects of a landmark judgement such as this will inevitably reverberate culturally through society. Instead of clarifying a narrow legal question, the binary nature of court cases may inadvertently give license to transphobia. The judgement may have an unintended maximalist effect in our culture, by allowing hostile individuals to falsely claim biology legally trumps identity in all circumstances.
Parliament’s lack of action
This could have been avoided, had Parliament acted. They could have issued an explanatory notice or rewritten part of the Act to clarify what sex meant. Yet the cowardice of politicians has led them to shy away from the debate and deem it too complex.
Parliament’s lack of action is the reason why this ruling is so important. New policy could be made to clarify trans rights and the meaning of gender identity, however, their silence has meant the debate will now be defined by the legal definition of “sex” in the Equality Act 2010.
Far from being a moment of clarity, activists claim this ruling has sparked confusion, fear and alienation. New questions are now being asked: What is the value of a GRC? What are the implications for trans men? How will sex be proven? Will this damage cisgender women who don’t conform to the traditional image of femininity? What is the meaning of gender identity? Should we place more importance on sex than gender?
Resources for Trans Individuals
- York LGBT forum runs a trans support group that takes place twice monthly.
- (6.30-8.30 on the second Thursday and last Sunday of each month at York Travellers Trust)
- For more details, contact trans@yorklgbtforum.org.
- Organisations supporting LGBT community https://www.york.ac.uk/about/equality/gender-equality/trans-non-binary/guidance-for-students/support/
- Uni of York LGBT Students Network https://yorksu.org/activities/view/lgbtq