UK Starmer Urges Public Bodies to Uphold Supreme Court Ruling on Sex-Based Rights

[Social Media]

 

Starmer Urges Public Bodies to Uphold Supreme Court Ruling on Sex-Based Rights

 

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has called on public institutions to comply with the Supreme Court's recent decision affirming that the legal definition of “woman” in the context of the Equality Act is based on biological sex. Addressing growing concerns over resistance from some public bodies, Starmer insisted that all official guidance must align with the ruling without further delay.

 

“Hospitals and government departments must get on with it,” the prime minister said, referencing institutions that have thus far failed to implement the ruling. Speaking to reporters, Starmer made his position clear: “I accepted the ruling; welcomed the ruling, and everything else flows from that as far as I’m concerned.” He added, “All guidance of whatever kind needs to be consistent with the ruling and we need to get to that position as soon as possible.”

 

The April 2025 Supreme Court decision clarified that references to “woman” in the Equality Act pertain to biological females. The ruling prompted a directive for all UK organisations to review and potentially revise their equality policies accordingly. Despite this, The Times recently reported that several government departments, including within Whitehall, have chosen to delay changes, citing the need for further instruction from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC). Some human resources teams have told staff that existing trans-inclusive policies will remain in place during the review period.

 

Meanwhile, the EHRC is in the process of drafting updated guidance aimed at assisting organisations in applying the ruling. However, the commission emphasized that the Supreme Court’s decision carries immediate legal weight. “The judgment is effective immediately,” the EHRC said, stressing that any supplementary guidelines should merely serve as tools to aid implementation, not as prerequisites for compliance.

 

Resistance is also evident in the health sector. According to The Times, some hospital administrators have chosen not to revise their internal policies until NHS England offers its own interpretation of the ruling. This has caused frustration among campaigners who view the delay as a dereliction of legal duty.

 

Maya Forstater, chief executive of the campaign group Sex Matters, welcomed the prime minister’s remarks. “This is an important intervention from the prime minister, given the huge number of public bodies failing to implement the Supreme Court judgment and operating outside the law,” she said. “Political leadership is essential if women whose rights are being stolen are not to be forced to turn to the courts, where public bodies will end up losing, at great expense to taxpayers.”

 

Forstater also highlighted the contrast between public and private sector responses. “It’s no coincidence that the private sector has been faster to bring their policies in line with the judgment, recognising what is at stake for the bottom line. Meanwhile most NHS, university and civil service leaders are sitting on their hands.”

 

She rejected the notion that further guidance was needed before compliance. “The law is clear and there is no need to wait for further guidance from the EHRC or anyone else,” Forstater said. “Unlike the small businesses and services for which the regulator’s guidance is intended, public sector organisations have access to specialist legal advice, as well as extra statutory obligations under the public sector equality duty.”

 

As the debate over legal definitions and gender policy continues to divide opinion, Starmer’s unequivocal stance signals a clear expectation: public institutions must now bring their policies in line with the law.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times  2025-07-01

 

 

[JonnyF]

A couple of years ago he didn't even know what a woman was. 

 

He really has become a laughing stock. What an embarrassment to Labour. 

[Watawattana]

Seems OFCOM is disagreeing with the Supreme Court's ruling.  They said "UK broadcasters must continue to give airtime to the belief that trans women are women".  Dear Keir, maybe time to ditch OFCOM if they cannot obey the law as clarified by the Supreme Court?

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

11 minutes ago, Watawattana said:

Seems OFCOM is disagreeing with the Supreme Court's ruling.  They said "UK broadcasters must continue to give airtime to the belief that trans women are women".  Dear Keir, maybe time to ditch OFCOM if they cannot obey the law as clarified by the Supreme Court?

 

 

The court ruling does not address the expression of trans views.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

A couple of years ago he didn't even know what a woman was. 

 

He really has become a laughing stock. What an embarrassment to Labour. 

Refreshing to once again have a PM who abides by court rulings, don’t you agree?

[James105]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Refreshing to once again have a PM who abides by court rulings, don’t you agree?

 

Did you need that court ruling to find out what a woman was too?  Bless.  

[Chomper Higgot]

8 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

Did you need that court ruling to find out what a woman was too?  Bless.  

No, the court ruling determines the law.

 

Bless.