Trans judge seeks rehearing after ruling on biological sex

Exclusive Victoria McCloud challenges the Supreme Court process at the European Court of Human Rights.

UKs first transgender judge seeks rehearing after ruling on biological sex

Victoria McCloud, the UK’s first transgender judge now working as a litigation strategist, has filed for a rehearing at the European Court of Human Rights. She argues the Supreme Court did not hear her representation or consider transgender perspectives in the case about the legal definition of a woman under the Equality Act 2010. The move follows the Court’s April ruling that transgender women with gender recognition certificates are not included in that definition. The case was brought by For Women Scotland, with other gender-critical groups intervening, and it has drawn attention to how evidence and voices from trans people were treated in high-level litigation.

The dispute comes as the Scottish government and public bodies face questions about how to implement the ruling. Meanwhile, the Equality and Human Rights Commission is updating its guidance, a process that critics say has been too quick or too slow, depending on who you ask. The EHRC chief executive defended the use of AI to help assess public responses to consultation while stressing the aim to deliver timely guidance to public bodies.

This case tests how far procedural fairness in high-stakes rights litigation can shape policy. By seeking a rehearing, McCloud puts the spotlight on whether fights over identity should be decided in court alone or include broader input from those affected. The tension between rapid policy guidance and careful legal process is evident, and the outcome could push lawmakers to adjust protections for transgender people or to tighten definitions in equality law.

The debate surrounding gender identity, public services, and school policies is highly sensitive. Legal battles often become political battlegrounds, and the path from court rulings to everyday life is not always smooth. This case shows how a single legal challenge can reverberate through government decisions and public opinion, potentially influencing future reforms.

Highlights

The legal process continues to test how rights claims translate into everyday protections.