Following months of deliberation, the apex court in the United Kingdom is to rule on For Women Scotland vs The Scottish Ministers. The case has been brought by a grassroots group of gender-critical women backed by JK Rowling. It focuses on the legal constraints surrounding statutory guidance issued by the Scottish ministers on the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018.
Despite claims to the contrary, the Supreme Court will not on Wednesday decide an answer to the question ‘what is a woman?’ Rather, it is to rule on how ‘woman’ and ‘man’ are defined for the purposes of the law. This may seem a pedantic distinction but, in a climate where lack of clarity has caused mayhem, pedantry is to be welcomed.
While this is Scottish legislation, it is necessary for all acts of the Scottish parliament to comply with reserved powers – including the UK-wide Equality Act 2010. The Gender Recognition Reform Act 2004 allows a male with a gender recognition certificate (GRC) to be a woman for the purposes of the 2018 Act – that is, a trans-identified male may fulfil an organisation’s quota of women.
Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in