PA mediaThe preacher who won a legal victory over the definition of a woman is taking action against the Scottish government, which says it is “incompatible” with the ruling.
Scotland for women has taken an action in the session court, claiming rules on transgender students in schools and transgender people in custody are “clear violations” of the Supreme Court’s decision in April.
The Judges ruled the words “women” and “sex” in the Equality Act 2010, referring to a biological woman and biological sex, as a legal challenge against Scottish ministers for Scotland.
A Scottish government spokesman said he was unable to comment on live action.
Guidance for single-sex toilets in schools tell young people “where possible” “should be able to use features that they feel the most comfortable”.
In prisons, the current guidelines allow a transgender woman to be admitted to women’s property. If the person does not meet violence against women and girls’ criteria and has no basis for “assuming”, they create “unacceptable risk of loss” to those kept in women’s property.
However, Scotland for women allege that those policies are “incompatible” Supreme Court’s decision And stay “stubborn in place”.
It has taken a simple action to reduce policies related to schools and jails. The Sunday Times,
In a statement, the group claimed that the remaining rules were for “weakened women and girls’ obstruction”.
It said that the Scottish government had 21 days to respond to the action.
“We are asking the court to issue an announcer that the guidance and prison guidance of the school is illegal and they decrease in the whole,” said this.
“We are also asking that both policies are suspended in the meantime.”
A spokesman for the Scottish government said: “It would be unfair to comment on the proceedings of the live court.”
What did the Supreme Court rule?
The case brought to the female Scotland is related to the definition of a “woman” under the equality law.
This especially surrounded the interpretation of the 2010 Equality Act, which applies throughout the UK.
Scotland for women argued that “women” referred to those who are born women and should only apply sex-based security defined in the Act.
The Scottish government said that transgender people with a gender recognition certificate (GRC) were entitled to the same sex-based security.
The judges unanimously ruled in favor of the woman Scotland in the case.
The Equality Act still provides protection to people to transport, and does not affect the protected characteristic of ruling gender revaluation.
The ruling meant that public bodies had to review the gender policies on the things of replacing toilets, rooms and hospital wards and installing it whether they were influenced by the law.
The Scottish Parliament reviewed its policies and the nominated men and women only to the toilet, although the penis neutral features with them maintained.
Others are still considering how they will update their guidance and practical features.
