The Supreme Court ruling
A response from the Centre for the Study of Sexuality and Culture
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 7844083 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Gareth Gavin (University of Manchester), J Stacey (0000-0002-5727-6345, University of Manchester, corresponding author), Ben Nichol, Ben Nichols (University of Manchester) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 34 |
| Issue | 7 |
| Pages | 1-6 |
| Publication date | 2025-08-08 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Gender Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0958-9236 • E-ISSN: 1465-3869 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/09589236.2025.2540797 |
| OpenAlex | W4413248239 |
| Language | EN |
On 16 April 2025, the UK Supreme Court issued a ruling on the meaning of ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010 (EA), after a group called For Women Scotland challenged the Scottish Government’s interpretation of the Act. The Scottish Government had interpreted safeguards that are provided in the EA for the protected characteristic of ‘sex’ to include people who have legally changed their sex and hold a ‘gender recognition certificate’. The Supreme Court ruled that, for the purposes of the EA, ‘sex’ means only what they term ‘biological sex’. Initial reactions to this ruling, such as from the Equality and Human Rights Commission, suggest it could have far-reaching consequences for trans rights in the UK. Members of the Centre for the Study of Sexuality and Culture respond below to various aspects of the ruling, drawing on their research in gender and sexuality studies to do so
Human sexuality · Political science · Sociology · Supreme court · African Sexualities and LGBTQ+ Issues · Feminism, Gender, and Sexuality Studies · Gender Studies · Historical Gender and Feminism Studies · Law
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |