Ingrid
LightNews LightNews
banner
winterreisende.bsky.social
Ingrid
@winterreisende.bsky.social
1K followers 660 following 9.6K posts
what power art thou who from below hast made me rise unwillingly and slow from beds of everlasting snow

I keep my online and offline lives separate. Academic, musician, writer, among other art forms. #nobridge
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Ingrid
kevinbaker.bsky.social
the arendt revival has been a fucking disaster.
December 8, 2025 at 5:21 PM
Reposted by Ingrid
goodlawproject.org
This is a real disaster for those - pretty much the entirety of the British media - advancing a maximalist reading of the For (Some) Women Scotland decision.
796. Thirdly, the claimant’s contention was in our view not consistent with the court’s comment that “we have concluded that a biological sex interpretation would not have the effect of disadvantaging or removing important protection under the EA 2010 from trans people (whether with or without a GRC).” 797. After that comment the court explained that a person with gender reassignment as a protected characteristic could pursue a claim of direct or indirect discrimination, or of harassment, if the circumstances so warranted. There was no qualification to it to the effect that that was not applicable in, for example, the context of a single sex space under Part 5 of the Act. If their decision had been that all trans persons must be excluded from the changing rooms or toilets for the sex they identify with because it was not the sex assigned at birth, and may also be excluded from the changing rooms or toilets of their biological sex, that in our view certainly does impact on their rights under section 7. 798. Were the claimant’s contention to be correct that would have the effect of materially reducing the extent to which that protected characteristic could be relied on by trans persons, to their disadvantage. What was desired by the trans person when living their life may not be permitted in a large number of practical instances, and would not have been consistent with the view expressed by Lady Hale in Work and Pensions, and the line of authority in relation to human rights. Such a construction in our view would also not be consistent with the interpretation of the Equal Treatment Directive from the CJEU and its predecessor as referred to above, which remains as assimilated law, and would not be consistent with a purposive interpretation still required. The development of the law in relation to what is now the protected characteristic of gender reassignment is set out above. At the very least we would have expected these considerations to have been addressed speci…
December 8, 2025 at 2:24 PM
Reposted by Ingrid
goodlawproject.org
This is the second decision - both first instance - since the appalling For (Some) Women Scotland decision to find that there is no trans bathroom ban. www.gov.uk/employment-t...
B M Kelly v Leonardo UK Ltd: 8001497/2024
Employment Tribunal decision.
www.gov.uk
December 8, 2025 at 1:36 PM