LONDON, UK — In a landmark ruling on Wednesday, the UK Supreme Court determined that the legal definition of a “woman” is based on biological sex at birth, a decision with profound implications for the ongoing debate over transgender rights in the country.
The case, which was brought to the Supreme Court by the Scottish gender-critical campaign group For Women Scotland (FWS), challenged the interpretation of the Equality Act 2010.
The ruling, handed down by five judges, concluded that the terms “woman” and “sex” in the Act refer to biological females, reinforcing the notion that sex, rather than gender identity, is the basis for legal protections in certain contexts.
Despite this ruling, the court emphasized that the Equality Act still provides protection for transgender individuals through the category of “gender reassignment.”
Justice Patrick Hodge, delivering the verdict, clarified that the Act protects trans individuals from discrimination based on their acquired gender, ensuring their rights are upheld in most areas.
The case centered on the Scottish government’s efforts to implement policies aimed at increasing the number of women in public sector roles, particularly through the use of gender-inclusive definitions.
FWS contested the inclusion of transgender women in these policies, arguing that biological sex should determine eligibility for female-only spaces and services.
The Supreme Court’s decision overturned previous judgments made in Scottish courts, where the Scottish government had argued that a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) granted to transgender women should provide them with the same legal protections as biological women under the Equality Act.
The judges ruled that this interpretation was incompatible with the 2004 Gender Recognition Act, which allows for legal recognition of gender change but does not equate a trans woman’s sex with that of a biological woman.
“This ruling validates what we have long believed: women are defined by their biological sex,” said Susan Smith, co-director of For Women Scotland, expressing gratitude outside the court. “Women can now feel secure that services and spaces designated for women are for biological women,” she added, as supporters cheered and embraced.
The judgment also highlights the tensions around “single-sex spaces” such as changing rooms, medical services, and hostels.
The court ruled that these spaces must operate on the basis of biological sex, a decision that may limit the access of transgender women to these areas, a key issue in the polarizing debate on trans rights.
While gender-critical campaigners celebrated the verdict, trans rights activists warned that it could fuel discrimination against transgender individuals.
The ruling comes amidst a wider global context where transgender rights are facing challenges, including in the United States, where the Trump administration sought to roll back protections for trans people.
The decision places pressure on UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s government, which has been relatively silent on trans issues since taking office.
The ruling may also prompt further clarification of sex and gender laws, especially as the government grapples with the tension between ensuring protections for women and respecting the rights of transgender individuals.
One of the most prominent figures in the gender-critical movement, author J.K. Rowling, has long supported the view that sex, not gender identity, should be the basis for legal recognition.
While her stance has led to significant backlash, including accusations of transphobia, she has continued to advocate for the protection of women’s spaces.
