‘A terrifying time’: Trans activists rally in London after UK Supreme Court ruling on definition of women

Thousands of protesters gathered in Parliament Square on Saturday in a show of anger and defiance following a UK Supreme Court ruling that excludes transgender women from the legal definition of “woman” under the Equality Act 2010.

The “emergency demonstration” was sparked by a judgment delivered on Wednesday (April 16), in which the court concluded that, under current legislation, the words “woman” and “sex” refer solely to biological females. The ruling effectively means that trans women, even those with gender recognition certificates, are not legally recognised as women for the purposes of the Act.

Amid rising concerns over the implications for trans rights, demonstrators waved flags and carried placards declaring “trans women are women” and “trans rights now” as speakers addressed the crowd under grey skies, according to Euronews.

More from World News

UK Supreme Court defines ‘who is a woman’ based on ‘biological sex’, transwomen not included Toilets, sports, prisons: How UK Supreme Court’s verdict defining women brings real-life changes

“It’s a terrifying time to have your rights taken away from you,” said Sophie Gibbs, a 19-year-old trans woman. “I was disappointed to think that we could live in a society that seems so progressive now but is willing to make such a dangerous and harmful ruling.”

While the court affirmed that transgender people remain protected from discrimination under the Act, campaigners say the decision marks a regressive turn in the legal recognition of trans identities and could be used to justify further restrictions in areas such as healthcare, housing and employment.

“It’s a Pandora’s box situation,” said Zuleha Oshodi, 29, who attended the protest. “We allow certain things, and then we open the door to way more than we ever thought could be accepted or pushed through.”

Impact Shorts

More Shorts

‘The cries of this widow will echo’: In first public remarks, Erika Kirk warns Charlie’s killers they’ve ‘unleashed a fire’

Trump urges Nato to back sanctions on Russia, calls for 50–100% tariffs on China

Legal blow to inclusion efforts

The ruling stems from a challenge to a 2018 Scottish law aimed at increasing the number of women on public boards, which allowed trans women with legal recognition of their gender to count toward a 50% quota. The Supreme Court struck down that interpretation, siding with gender-critical campaign group For Women Scotland, which argued the legislation unlawfully expanded the definition of “woman”.

The group, which has support from figures including author JK Rowling, welcomed the judgment, saying it affirmed protections for single-sex spaces and the distinct legal category of biological sex. Critics, however, fear it sets a precedent that could roll back trans inclusion in a range of public services.

Baroness Kishwer Falkner, chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, said the ruling would likely impact access for trans women to women’s-only toilets, hospital wards and sports teams.

Divided political response

Scotland’s First Minister, John Swinney, acknowledged the ruling while expressing solidarity with trans people.

Scotland’s First Minister John Swinney said Saturday that he “understands” the “hurt and anguish” trans people are feeling over the verdict while accepting that the ruling must be followed.

According to the latest census, around 116,000 people in Great Britain identify as transgender, though just 8,500 have obtained a gender recognition certificate – a legal document that allows a person to change the sex on their birth certificate.

For many in the trans community, the ruling feels like a betrayal at a time when they had hoped for greater rights and recognition. Advocacy groups have warned that the legal interpretation could further marginalise an already vulnerable population.

Saturday’s demonstration in London echoed similar rallies held across the UK in recent months, as trans rights activists continue to push back against what they describe as a sustained rollback of hard-won legal and social protections.