(LifeSiteNews) — We knew it was coming: the legal pushback to the U.K. Supreme Court’s ruling that “woman,” as defined by the “Equality Act,” means biological female, has arrived.
“Victoria” McCloud, known as the United Kingdom’s “first transgender judge,” has filed a case against the U.K. in the European Court of Human Rights “challenging the process that led to the supreme court’s ruling on biological sex.”
McCloud, a transgender-identifying man, is asking for the case that led to the ruling – For Women Scotland Ltd. V The Scottish Ministers – to be reheard. Last March, it was reported that McCloud requested leave to join the litigation in the case for the Good Law Project; that request was denied by the Supreme Court last October.
McCloud was appointed to the bench in 2010, but resigned in February 2024, stating that: “I have reached the conclusion that in 2024, the nation situation and present judicial framework is no longer such that it is possible in a dignified way to be both ‘trans’ and a salaried, fairly prominent judge in the UK.” Following his resignation, McCloud left the U.K. to reside in the Republic of Ireland.
McCloud is claiming in his filing that the Supreme Court neglected his Article 6 right to a fair trial for declining his request to join the litigation and that the Court also did not sufficiently include pro-transgender groups or other individuals in the process, while accepting interventions from anti-gender ideology groups such as Sex Matters.
McCloud’s filing to the European Court of Human Rights is being backed by both his own employer, W-Legal, as well as the “Trans Legal Clinic,” and, in addition to claiming a violation of Article 6, is also calling for a rehearing of the case under Articles 8 and 14 of the European Convention of Human Rights. The ruling violates “essentially the rights to respect for who I am, my family, my human existence, my right to a fair trial in matters determining my own freedoms and obligations without discrimination,” he said, defining his “existence” based on his gender confusion.
According to McCloud: “No representation or evidence had been included from us in the 8,500 group [the estimated U.K. population of people with Gender Recognition Certificates who are diagnosed as transsexual]. I was refused. The court gave no reasoning. The court reversed my and 8,500 other people’s [purported] sex for the whole of equality law.”
“We are now two sexes at once,” he continued. “We are told we must use dangerous spaces such as male changing rooms and loos when we have female anatomy. If we are raped we must go to male rape crisis. We are searched by male police, to ‘protect’ female police from, I assume, our female anatomy.” McCloud dismisses the case for female-specific spaces on the grounds that he is “female,” in contradiction to biology and the Supreme Court ruling.
Meanwhile, McCloud is not the only player in the gender culture war filing lawsuits. For Women Scotland, the women’s rights group that brought the initial case to the Supreme Court, has condemned the Scottish government for lagging in implementation of the decision and cited “extraordinary pushback” against the ruling; they have stated that they plan to sue the government for “refusing to abide by April’s judgement, in particular around schools and prison policy.”
If the European Court of Human Rights were to rule in McCloud’s favour, the U.K. could comply by passing new legislation or ordering a rehearing of the case. That seems unlikely due to the fact that transgender ideology is a contentious topic in many European countries, and the ECHR will be wary about wading into the debate considering the potential political fallout.
