On April 16, 2025 the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom handed down a landmark ruling, defining “woman” and “sex” for purposes of the Equality Act. The Equality Act was passed by Parliament in 2010 for the purpose of consolidating discrimination law for groups, including women, who had suffered historic discrimination. The definitions for “woman” and “sex,” have always been based on immutable biology, according to the ruling. It’s now up to lawmaking and policy-making bodies to conform to the judicial ruling; transport police, for instance, have already barred body searches of women by men who claim to be women.
While the Court stated that “transgender” people will continue to be protected from discrimination based on either their status as “trans” or someone’s perception of them as female, the ruling is a significant win for women and girls, including lesbians. Lesbians were specifically mentioned, in fact, with respect to now being able to define themselves as exclusively female, thereby excluding all males. This is spectacularly good news for UK lesbians, who have experienced discrimination in public places such as pubs for being perceived as “TERFs,” that is, for excluding males from their public gatherings. That discrimination would now be unlawful.
UK TERF activists (and lesbian activists in particular), including For Women Scotland (plaintiff), Lesbian Intervenors, Scottish Lesbians, Women’s Declaration International, and more, should be credited for advocacy that led to this major legal victory.
What’s next? Informally we have heard some discussion that the UK’s 2004 Gender Recognition Act, which allows people to change their legal (or “certificated”) sex designation, may be a target in the ongoing campaign for women’s sex-based rights.
Does this ruling have significance for the United States? It’s hard to imagine that it doesn’t. In United States v. Skrmetti, currently pending before the United States Supreme Court (in which WDI USA submitted an amicus brief), the Court will decide, probably in the next month or so, whether the State of Tennessee can ban medical procedures designed to disguise the sex of minors. Should the Justices be inclined to uphold the ban, this UK ruling could be seen as providing some cover, even though the judiciary is supposed to resist cultural trends. For a detailed analysis of what this UK ruling might mean for all of us, Kara Dansky provides some insights here.
Here’s to you, TERF Island! A nice cup of hot tea and a pint in your honor!
The WDI USA Board
Elizabeth Chesak
Katherine Kinney
Irene Lawrence
Lauren Levey
