Sir James Edie QC is speaking for the government. (The same Sir James we beat in the ONS case but we won't hold that against him :-D) /2
JEQC: Does respect for private life (Article 8) impose a positive obligation on the state to take action? If so then EVERY country that doesn't allow X in passport is in breach. The fact they don't is because there is a wide margin of appreciation (leeway) for each state /3
#Xpassports
Discussions begin round Human Rights Article 8 (right to private life). Court has previously agreed that Article 8 IS engaged. Refusing X on a passport does interfere with human rights. The issue before the court is whether this interference is justified /1
Appellant QC raises the issue of how human rights leads to positive obligations on the state. What is the margin of appreciation when considering the impact on wider society? Wide or narrow? /2
Appellant QC argues there is a positive obligation on the state to 'recognise' a non-gendered identity. The UK gov has not yet accepted this obligation. Therefore refusal to allow an X on a passport is a lack of recognition rather than an implementation issue. /3
Follow @fairplaywomen for live tweets and reaction from the Supreme Court today. Judges hear an appeal to allow people who identify as non-binary to put an X in the sex box on their passport /1
All sounds pretty harmless doesn't it. But beware. It has the potential to undermine women's rights because it opens the door to people claiming they are 'sexless'. /2
We've seen this before with transgender issues. The concepts of gender identity & sex get conflated.
It starts out with "a man can identify as a woman". Next its claimed that humans can *actually* change sex and a penis can be a female sex organ. And only transphobes disagree /3
**NEWS THREAD**
Tomorrow the Supreme Court will hear an appeal to force UK gov to record X on passports. This would be a first step towards state-recognition of non-binary identities. If the appeal is won it threatens women's sex-based rights. Here's why/1 fairplayforwomen.com/non-binary-the…
In April, Fair Play For Women instructed barrister Jason Coppell QC to seek permission to intervene at the Supreme Court. You can read our full submission to court here /2
We argued that refusing X on passports is justified because of the wider impact on society and in particular women's rights. X conveys the ideological message that humans can be sex-less. That some people are neither male nor female. Sex isn’t universal. This matters because.../3
Zoe Watts has been convicted and jailed for making homemade bomb and weapons. It is widely known that Watts was born male and now identifies as a woman. The birth sex of Watts would have been easy for a journalist to find /2
There is plenty of public domain information available, including previous reporting by other newspapers. Watts has also run transgender awareness courses for the police. By making their trans history public Watts also makes their male birth sex known /3 lincolnshireunison.org/assets/downloa…
@GBNEWS@AskNic "nobody is arguing that transgender prisoners shouldn't be in women's prisons because they are transgender, its because they are male. There are reasons we keep other males out of female prisons and all those same reasons apply to males who identify as women" /2
@GBNEWS@AskNic "The judge has decided...that we do need to consider the rights of transgender women - even if they are sex offenders - to live alongside women. Although its lawful I think we need to ask ourselves as a society is it right" /3