Labour Moves to Align With Court Ruling, Excludes Trans Women From All-Female Shortlists

[Social Media]

 

Labour Moves to Align With Court Ruling, Excludes Trans Women From All-Female Shortlists

 

The Labour Party is set to exclude transgender women from all-women shortlists in a move that aligns with a recent Supreme Court ruling clarifying the legal definition of "woman" under the Equality Act. The party’s National Executive Committee (NEC) will vote on measures to revise its positive action policies so that they comply with the judgment, ending the practice of relying on self-identification in determining eligibility for women-only spaces and roles.

 

 

This shift comes as the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) prepares to launch a consultation on revised guidance to service providers. The updated guidance is intended to assist organisations in implementing the Supreme Court's April ruling, which stated that sex-based provisions in the Equality Act refer to biological sex. Although the EHRC's forthcoming recommendations are not expected to deviate substantially from an interim update issued earlier this year, they are said to include around 40 pages of detail, with ten dedicated to guidance on maintaining single-sex spaces.

 

The interim guidance had already sparked backlash, with critics arguing it effectively barred transgender women from accessing women’s facilities such as changing rooms and lavatories. More than 1,000 individuals signed an open letter to the EHRC, claiming the guidance ignored the need to protect trans, non-binary, and intersex individuals from discrimination. The Good Law Project has also committed to challenging the guidance in court, stating that it is “either wrong in law or, if right, breaches the UK’s obligations under the Human Rights Act 1998.”

 

Despite these objections, sources have confirmed that the EHRC will continue recommending biological sex as the determining factor for services claiming to be single-sex. The consultation period, which was initially planned for two weeks, has been extended to six following pressure from advocacy groups. After the consultation concludes, the guidance will be reviewed by Bridget Phillipson, the minister for women and equalities, before being submitted to Parliament.

 

A confidential report to the Labour NEC acknowledged the legal implications of the Supreme Court ruling, stating that it is “not legally defensible to continue to apply [positive action] measures on a basis other than relating [to] individuals who were biological women at birth only.” The report noted that this affects not only shortlists but also who may attend Labour’s women’s conference or stand as a women’s officer, adding that continuing to operate on a self-identification basis could “expose the party to significant risk of direct and indirect discrimination claims succeeding.”

 

The document further concluded that “it is unlawful to operate [all-women shortlist] arrangements that include transwomen,” warning that a man excluded from such a shortlist could mount a successful sex discrimination claim. Due to the heightened attention on the ruling, the NEC was also advised that this year’s women’s conference could face security concerns and protests. The report suggested postponement to avoid legal and political risks, including overshadowing Labour’s broader national conference.

 

NEC members are now tasked with choosing between two options: defining all positive action based on biological sex at birth or suspending such measures altogether during a review. The latter, however, was described as “disproportionate.”

 

A Labour spokesperson commented: “The Labour Party has been clear that we respect the Supreme Court judgment — and like other organisations, we will comply with statutory guidance once published. Ministers will consider the EHRC code of practice when a draft is submitted.”

 

Maya Forstater, chief executive of the charity Sex Matters, praised Labour’s move, calling it “good news that the Labour Party NEC is being urged to accept that women and men are, and always have been, two biological sexes.” However, she criticized the recommendation to postpone the women’s conference, saying: “The suggestion that the right thing to do is to postpone the women’s conference rather than simply running the event as it was always intended to be — for women — is simply outrageous.” Forstater added, “There would be no good reason to postpone the planned conference just because it is for women, as defined in the Equality Act. This is direct discrimination against women in the Labour Party.”

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times  2025-05-21