UN experts call on the UK to ensure equal rights for women, girls, and transgender individuals News
Anfaenger / Pixabay
UN experts call on the UK to ensure equal rights for women, girls, and transgender individuals

A group of UN experts on Friday called for the United Kingdom to guarantee that the current reviews of statutory guidance under the Equality Act 2010 align with international human rights standards and provide the equal enjoyment of rights for women and girls, including the transgender community.

The group of experts expressed appreciation of the government’s assurances that the legislative review would be conducted in a non-discriminatory manner, commenting, “The present review represents an important opportunity for the United Kingdom to reaffirm its long-standing commitment to equality, dignity and the rule of law, and to ensure that the human rights of all are upheld in practice.”

This new development comes amid a changing legal horizon characterized by years of intense litigation, a polarized social climate, and conflicting guidance from equality organizations regarding the intersection of gender identity and biological sex. In April 2025, the UK Supreme Court ruled in For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers that references to “sex,” “man,” and “woman” in the Equality Act 2010 refer to an individual’s biological sex. This means that the legal sex of transgender individuals, which is determined by their possession of a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC), is no longer considered their “sex” for the purposes of the Equality Act, rendering the marginalized community more vulnerable to exclusion from single-sex services and affecting their ability to challenge sex-based discrimination.

Following the 2025 ruling, organizations such as the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), the official regulator of the Equality Act 2010, began updating its guidelines to clarify that service providers were legally entitled to restrict access to single-sex spaces such as bathrooms based on biological sex. The interim guidance provided by the EHRC was challenged by the Good Law Project, which stated that it was legally flawed, a harmful interpretation of the Supreme Court ruling, and produced only nine days after the publication of the Supreme Court’s judgment, with minimal consultation on the issue sought.

The High Court dismissed the case on February 13, 2026, as it found that the Supreme Court’s ruling was properly applied and that the Good Law Project lacked the proper standing to bring the case, since it did not suffer direct harm as a result of the decision. In light of this, the group of UN experts pushed for the United Kingdom to ensure that the review process was inclusive and complied with international human rights frameworks such as Article 2(2) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), which prohibits discrimination based on gender identity.

THIS DAY @ LAW

Reichstag Fire Decree issued in Germany

On February 28, 1933, German President Paul von Hindenburg issued the Presidential Decree for the Protection of People and State in response to the burning of the Reichstag (the German Parliament building) on the previous day. More commonly known as the Reichstag Fire Decree, the law suspended many key civil liberties, such as free press, habeas corpus, and warrant requirements. Blaming Communists for the attack on the Reichstag, the Nazi party and newly-appointed Chancellor Adolf Hitler pressed the law through as a first step in establishing absolute control over Germany. On March 23, the German Parliament passed the Enabling Act, which empowered Adolf Hitler to become the dictator of Germany. Four months later on July 14, the Nazis solidified their control over Germany with the passage of the Law Against the Establishment of Parties eliminated all political parties in Germany other than the Nazi Party.

Congress ratified Manypenny Agreement on the Black Hills

On February 28, 1877, the US Congress ratified the Manypenny Agreement with the Lakota Sioux, under which the United States took control of 900,000 acres of the Black Hills. Read the ratification act, which includes the terms of the Agreement. The Lakota argue to this day that the agreement is illegal, was obtained by coercion associated with starvation, and that the Black Hills should be returned to them.