The UK Supreme Court has unanimously upheld the biological definition of woman set out in the Equality Act 2010.
This ended a years-long legal battle that could have had major consequences for the understanding of gender-based rights as they apply in Scotland, England and Wales.
The case was initiated by a group For women in Scotland, against the authorities there, arguing that gender-based protections should only apply to biologically born women.
Judge Lord Patrick Hodge said that the ruling did not mean a victory for one side, emphasizing that the law still protects transgender people from discrimination.
The Scottish government has not yet commented on the court's decision.
- "What is a woman?": A key ruling in Australia
- The author of the novel about Harry Potter raised dust in Scotland: "Transgender women are men, they know what a woman is"
- What Trump's "two-gender" policy means for the world
The Scottish government has argued in court that transgender people with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) are entitled to the same gender-based protections as biological women.
The Supreme Court was to decide The Supreme Court was asked to decide on the correct interpretation of the Equality Act 2010, which applies across Britain.
The key questions are how the law defines "gender" and "women," Hodge pointed out.
"The court unanimously decided that the law on the terms woman and gender refers to biological woman and biological sex."
"This ruling does not mean that one group has defeated the other," he explained.
The judge also pointed out that the law still protects transgender people "from direct and indirect discrimination, as well as harassment based on their acquired gender."
On the eve of the decision, activists gathered in front of the Supreme Court.
"The judges confirmed what we have always believed, which is that women are protected by their biological sex."
"Women can rest easy: services and spaces designed for women will continue to be available to them. We are grateful to the court for this decision," said Susan Smith, founder of the group. For the women of Scotland.
A British government spokesman said the decision sends a clear message and gives women confidence in facilities such as "hospitals, shelters and sports clubs."
"Laws protect facilities where spaces are clearly separated by gender, and this government will protect them as well," he added.
The ruling is "a victory for every woman who has faced abuse or been fired because she refused to remain silent," she said. Kemi Badenoch, leader of the Scottish Conservatives.
But Meg Chapman, a Green Party member and prominent transgender rights campaigner, said it was "a worrying human rights ruling and a huge blow to some of the most marginalised people in society".
"Many transgender people and their loved ones are left without protection, and the question is what other consequences the decision will have on their lives," she warned.
Spaces divided by gender
If the court sided with the government, it would affect institutions where departments or rooms are clearly separated by gender, such as hospitals, prisons, shelters and support groups, the group warned. For the women of Scotland.
On the other hand, transgender people indicate that they will remain unprotected and subject to discrimination due to their gender reassignment.
This case follows years of heated debates about transgender and women's rights.
The judges explained that interpreting gender as "administratively confirmed" instead of biological would "incoherently affect the definition of male and female."
They said that "administratively confirmed" gender would weaken protections for lesbians and that trans women who are attracted to straight women could be treated as lesbians.
The biological interpretation of gender is important for gender-segregated spaces to "function coherently."
They cite examples of locker rooms, hostels and hospitals.
They noted that there is similar confusion in some other sectors such as the military, sports or the public sector.
"The practical problems that arise in connection with administratively confirmed gender clearly show that this interpretation is not correct," they added.
- Fraudulent trans person subjected to conversion therapy in Siberia
- 'From now on, women's sports will be for women only': Trump's new order
- "I'm transgender, my partner is straight"
A multi-year legal dispute
This legal battle began in 2018, when the school parliament passed a law ensuring gender balance on public sector boards.
Group For the women of Scotland protested because ministers included transgender people as part of the quotas in that law.
This issue has been challenged several times in the Scottish courts.
A new case came before the Scottish Parliament in Holyrood, and Judge Lady Shauna Haldane ruled in 2022 that the definition of gender is not affected by "how someone was born."
The Scottish Parliament passed reforms that year that made it easier to change previously recognized gender.
The move was blocked by the British government.
- Why modern medicine ignores transgender people
- Transgender female chess players are prohibited from participating in women's tournaments
- What science says about the half-two boxers debate
BBC is in Serbian from now on and on YouTube, follow us HERE.
Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube i Viber. If you have a topic suggestion for us, please contact bbcnasrpskom@bbc.co.uk
Bonus video:
