E.G.4Me: UK Supreme Court defines a woman

[MUSIC] Keeping your A-level politics lessons truly current with the relentless pace of UK and US politics, it's a constant challenge. Just look at the last couple of weeks alone. That's where Cooper Education steps in. Their live CPD webinars, delivered by Simon Lemieux, will provide you with narrative, analysis and data to help you enrich your teaching and foster discussion about current UK and US political events with your students. Head over to Cooper-HyphenEducation.com to explore their webinar schedule and book your place. That's Cooper-HyphenEducation.com. And here's the great part. You can book today and Cooper education will simply invoice your school for payment after the webinar. So there's absolutely no upfront cost for you. On top of that, as a listener of the A-level politics show, UseCode Politics 20. That's Politics 20 before the 31st of May at the checkout to get 20% off. Stay sharp, save time, visit Cooper-HyphenEducation.com. UseCode Politics 20. Now, let's start the show. [Music] Welcome to the A-level politics shows EG for me. Your one-stop shop for political news conveyed in a way that's useful for your exams. The UK Supreme Court has ruled that the definition of a woman is based upon their biological sex. The decision was handed down after the court was asked to decide whether trans women with gender recognition certificates, a formal document that recognises a person's new gender, had the same protections from sex discrimination under the Equality Act 2010. It ruled that while the trans community do enjoy protections as a protected group under this law, they do not qualify for the specific protections that biological women enjoy under the same act. The decision allows single sex services to exclude trans women, for example, women's only hospital wards or sports teams. It is the culmination of a better fight for women's groups seeking to protect women only spaces and trans rights groups who feel that the whole debate is taken on a persecutorial tone. You will have your own views on this matter, but I'm simply here to tell you how to use this example in your exams or give you some suggestions. So, where? How can you use it? Number one, you could use it to demonstrate the immense power of judges. The Equality Act did not define a woman. vague legislation always allows judges the power, maybe too much power, to determine matters of public significance. Is it the right place, the UK Supreme Court, for these decisions to be made? Number two, or are judges simply doing their job, filling the void left by politicians to scared to weigh into a debate of real political significance? Number three, you could use this in the pressure groups topic when thinking about pressure group methods. JK Rowling's support for women's only spaces is a great example of celebrity endorsement. Number four, further still, you can write about how well-resourced pressure groups that utilise multiple access points have better chances of success. Campaign group four women Scotland took their case to the nation's top court after not getting what they wanted from the SMP-led Scottish government. Meanwhile, trans rights groups have been limited by their outsider status in Westminster, and have been forced instead to resort to direct action through protest the weekend following the ruling. They have the support of the Green Party nationally and the SMP in Scotland, but not really any other party. The government had said that it will respect the court ruling. Number five, you could also think about this example when considering the independence and neutrality of the court. The Good Law Project argues that the court was too easily persuaded by women's campaigners and failed to listen to the concerns of the trans community. The group commissioned a UGUB survey, UGUB, UGUB survey, some while back, of how people with different protected characteristics under the equality's legislation trusted the judiciary. It showed that the lowest level of trust in the judiciary was held by trans people. The perception of bias is just as damaging as overt bias since it's really causing to question the court's legitimacy. Number six, the case arguably demonstrates the limits of devolution. The Scottish government believed very strongly that transgender people should be treated exactly the same regardless of biology under the Equality Act, yet a national court has thrown Scotland's gender recognition scheme into doubt. Number seven, the example can also be used when considering the tension between individual and collective rights and how they are sometimes irreconcilable. Maybe in this case the individual right of a trans woman to access similar services has been sacrificed for the collective rights of biological women to feel safe in single sex spaces. This is true even despite Lord Hodg's or the Supreme Court counselling against and I quote, "reading this judgment as a triumph of one or more groups in our society at the expense of another." End quote. Number eight, it also demonstrates the new right shift of the conservative party on social and moral issues as Kemi Badnox party welcomed the ruling and demanded a further broader review into equality and gender recognition laws. Number nine, the example can be linked back to Parliament's legislative function. In some ways the Equality Act was written as a careful compromise. It acknowledged that multiple groups needed protecting including women and the trans community and it carved out a compromise between women's groups and LGBTQ group stonewall about the need for some exclusions or some instances where women, ball, women needed separate facilities. Number ten, yet clearly it shows the failure also of the legislative function because that consensus I just described broke down and indeed it shows the inability of Parliament to provide a definition of sex and its unwillingness to do so which has created huge tensions that has made the transgender community in particular feel really worried and very vulnerable. What else can you use this example for? Let me know of your ideas in the comments. If you found this brief snippet useful then have a think about subscribing to the A level politics show plus plus plus for just £1.99 a month. You get access to the entire back catalogue of podcasts including EG for me episodes like this one. It's a great deal for less than a coffee each month you get over 187 episodes of politics pods which are guaranteed to help you with your A level. Cancel anytime, Deet in the show notes. I'll also put a link to today's new story in those show notes should you wish to find out more. Okay then see you back here soon. Bye.