UK Supreme Court Rules Trans Women Aren’t Women, Upholds Biology and Sanity

This ruling, delivered on April 16, 2025, concludes a protracted legal battle initiated by the feminist organization For Women Scotland against the Scottish government's interpretation of gender definitions in public policy.​

The case centered on the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018, which allowed men who identify as women—those who have acquired a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC)—to occupy seats on public boards specifically reserved for women.

In practice, this meant that men were being counted as "women" to fulfill diversity quotas. A feminist organization called For Women Scotland challenged this inclusion, arguing that it diluted the intent of sex-based protections. The Supreme Court agreed, stating that the Equality Act's references to "woman" and "sex" pertain to sex, not gender identity.​

The reinterpretation of “woman” pushed by advocates of transgenderism has allowed men into leadership roles, awards categories, prisons, hospital wards, rape crisis centers, and women’s sports, effectively erasing the very group those protections were meant to serve. In some horrifying cases, violent male offenders claimed a female identity to gain access to women’s prisons, where they went on to harass or assault female inmates. The idea that simply declaring oneself a woman entitles someone to the rights and spaces of women became, effectively, state policy.

What this ruling restores is a legal distinction between sex and identity, cutting off the ability for men to exploit self-identification as a political or legal tactic. It reaffirms that being a woman is not a costume or a claim—it is a biological and social reality with material consequences, and women deserve laws that reflect that reality.

Outside the court, supporters of For Women Scotland celebrated the decision. Susan Smith, co-director of the organization, expressed gratitude, saying, "The judges have said what we always believed to be the case—that women are protected by their biological sex. That sex is real, and women can now feel safe that services and spaces designated for women are for women." 

Author J.K. Rowling, a vocal advocate for sex-based rights, also welcomed the ruling. In a social media post, she praised the efforts of the women behind the case, stating, "It took three extraordinary, tenacious Scottish women with an army behind them to get this case...I'm so proud to know you." ​

Unsurprisingly, the decision has been met with antagonism from transgenderism advocates. Organizations like Amnesty International and Stonewall have criticized the ruling, claiming that it erodes the "rights" of men who claim to be women.

The ruling has significant implications for the provision of single-sex services and spaces, such as women's shelters, hospital wards, and sports competitions. It clarifies that these services can lawfully exclude men who identify as women.

Around the world, there’s a growing movement to reassert the importance of sex-based rights in law and public policy, particularly in response to the rapid militancy of gender identity ideology into schools, sports, medicine, and government.

In the United States, the Trump administration has taken a similar stance, especially in the realm of Title IX protections. The administration has proposed rules that would clearly define “sex” as biological sex, not self-declared gender identity, in federal education policies. That would mean schools couldn’t be forced to let males compete in girls’ sports or use girls’ locker rooms simply by identifying as female.

The U.S. Department of Education under Trump is also prioritizing parental rights and transparency around gender identity policies in schools—after years of stories about girls being blindsided by males in their changing rooms, or parents being kept in the dark about school-facilitated gender transitions.

In Europe, countries like Sweden, Denmark, and Finland have also taken steps back from the more extreme gender identity policies they once endorsed. Many are revisiting medical protocols for youth transition and re-centering sex in single-sex services and statistics collection.

The global message is clear: laws must be based on reality, not ideology. And in this moment, the UK’s Supreme Court ruling stands as a significant victory, not just for Scottish women, but for the international movement to reclaim fairness and truth in law.

Subscribe today to get unlimited access to all of Evie’s premium content.