I expect the misleading headline and first para of this article to be urgently corrected. Trans people's rights haven't been reduced and I didn't at any time say that they had. I said that trans people have been lied to about what their rights are.

theguardian.com/society/2025/j… The first paragraph has now been slightly changed but the headline remains defamatory

@GreenJennyJones @soniasodha @ForWomenScot @MForstater @carla_denyer 🧵It’s an inevitable consequence of the judgment.

In general an association mustn’t discriminate against a person by depriving them of membership because of a protected characteristic: s.101(1). So eg a reading group can’t say “no disabled people” /1 @GreenJennyJones @soniasodha @ForWomenScot @MForstater @carla_denyer But there’s an exception which says that an association can be limited to people who share a protected characteristic: Sch 16 para 1. Thus an association can be limited to women, disabled people, older people, black people etc /2

There are several concerning legal inaccuracies in this piece by barrister Sam Fowles about yesterday’s landmark #SupremeCourt decision in For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers 🧵⬇️
theguardian.com/commentisfree/… 1. The decision does not leave the legal rights of women untouched and nor does it make the legal landscape more complex. Quite the reverse on both counts.

This report is an interesting contribution to the debate on free speech in higher education. There’s quite a lot I disagree with – a few initial thoughts in 🧵⬇️. For more lively debate on this subject don’t forget to sign up for the @officestudents #OfSInsight event next week!

https://twitter.com/Daragh_Murray/status/1600441151441768451

Link here:

https://twitter.com/officestudents/status/1589543482451902471?s=20&t=jQ5BxfGSW0M5Grdy6gJFiA