reSee.it - Tweets Saved By @boswelltoday

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

1/no idea🧵 Apologies in advance. This is a long thread. Can feel it in my water. But the Labour MPs’ letter to the @EHRC is being passed off as serious legal critique and it isn’t. If you're someone who still cares about law, process and rights in balance, read on.⬇️

@tonyvaughanMP - Tony Vaughan KC MP

🏳️‍⚧️🚨 New letter from MPs on trans rights & EHRC Consultation on the #ForWomenScotland ruling. I have written a letter to the EHRC to urgently raise concerns about the Draft Code of Practice consultation after the ruling. I am proud to say that 32 of my colleagues share these concerns and have signed it too. We are clear: the Supreme Court did not permit any erosion of trans rights. Yet, the EHRC’s Interim Guidance and the approach in the Draft Code open the door to discrimination and harassment against trans people. They have caused distress and confusion and sown division. The EHRC’s response to the ruling has undermined confidence in its ability to provide authoritative and clear guidance, and to advise the Government and UK citizens on navigating this complex area. The letter raises several key questions for the EHRC and urges it to provide guidance explaining how service providers and others can remain trans-inclusive if they wish to do so, in compliance with the law. The EHRC should reconsider its approach in the interests of legal clarity, practicality and the fundamental rights and dignity of all those affected. #TransRights #EHRC #EqualityMatters

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

2/ The letter claims the EHRC has overreached the @ForWomenScot ruling. It hasn’t. The Supreme Court confirmed that in the Equality Act, “sex” means biological sex. Not identity, not belief, not feeling. Biology.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

3/ The EHRC isn’t making policy. It is responding to precedent. The judgment binds. The Commission must update its Code to reflect it. This is not ideological. It’s legal obligation.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

4/ The letter tries to draw a line: trans people with a Gender Recognition Certificate are affected, others are not. That’s not how it works. The Court didn’t create carve-outs. It defined a statutory term. That applies across the Act.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

5/ The MPs accuse the EHRC of causing “distress” and “harm” by issuing interim guidance. Serious charges, offered without a shred of evidence. No examples, no stakeholder testimony, no data. Just emotion in search of legal weight.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

6/ They say the EHRC should have waited. For what? Clarity had just been handed down by the Supreme Court. Silence at that point would have been negligence. Regulators are there to clarify, not play dead.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

7/ Yes, the consultation window is short. Six weeks. But this isn’t new policy. It’s regulatory housekeeping after a judgment. Speed may frustrate some, but delay would frustrate the rule of law.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

8/ The letter has a glaring hole. It refuses to acknowledge competing rights. Women’s groups, faith-based providers, victims of trauma, even the organisations delivering services, are nowhere to be found.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

9/ Schedule 3 of the Equality Act allows single-sex services in certain contexts. That is still the law. Yet this letter frames any attempt to apply that law as discrimination. It’s not. It’s statute.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

10/ The MPs list unanswered questions. Many are already covered in existing EHRC materials. Others amount to demands that the EHRC contradict the Court. Not consultation. Political theatre.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

11/ This really isn’t a parliamentary intervention. It’s procedural ambush. Delay, confuse, overwhelm, claim harm, ignore precedent, demand deference. It’s all in the playbook. We know this.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

12/ They dress it up as trans inclusion. But what they actually propose is the removal of any meaningful right for service providers to ever say no. That’s really not inclusion - it's compelled lying.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

13/ They don’t ask why the original For Women Scotland case was brought. Don’t mention the litigants. Don’t weigh their rights. The letter makes no space for anyone who doesn’t agree.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

14/ It also implies that unless the EHRC does what they want, it has become unsafe, untrustworthy and politically corrupted. That’s a serious accusation, casually made.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

15/ What’s really being asked here is that the EHRC ignore legal clarity in favour of political pressure. That’s how capture works. Slowly, and then all at once.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

16/ If you believe in the rule of law, in rights that can coexist, and in the importance of institutional independence, then this letter should worry you. Not because of what it says. But because of what it demands others must not be allowed to say. 🔚

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

1/10🧵 For over a decade, the Scottish Government quietly rewrote the legal meaning of “woman” — not through Parliament, but through policy. No law. No debate. Just guidance, data rules and admin tweaks. This was self-ID by stealth. Here’s how they pulled it off.⬇️ https://t.co/VoJ0go1UJd

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

2/10 In 2014, the prison service let a trans rights lobbyist help draft its transgender prisoner policy. Male offenders could be housed with women. No vote. No scrutiny. Just a quiet shift, dressed as inclusion. A small policy. Huge consequences.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

3/10 In 2018, the Public Boards Act was redefined to count biological males as women — even without legal transition. It took @ForWomenScot and a court ruling to strike it down. The government had tried to rewrite protected characteristics by sleight of hand.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

4/10 In 2021, schools were told to let boys identifying as girls use girls’ toilets and changing rooms. The guidance claimed there was no legal obligation for single-sex spaces. No consultation. Just state-sanctioned policy capture.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

5/10 Then came the data. Public bodies were told to record identity, not biology. Male rapists could now appear as “female” in crime stats — and did. This wasn’t a system error. It was official guidance from the Scottish Government.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

6/10 Scotland’s 2022 census allowed self-ID on the sex question — regardless of birth certificate or legal status. The rest of the UK refused. Holyrood embedded gender ideology into the national record — and called it progress.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

7/10 By the time the GRR Bill hit headlines, self-ID had already crept into prisons, schools, the NHS, and official data. The bill failed, but the principles behind it were already policy. Unvoted. Undebated. Unseen.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

8/10 Then came Isla Bryson. A male double rapist with post-conviction-onset dysphoria, identifying as female, sent to a women’s prison. Ministers acted shocked — but the policy that allowed it had been in place for years. The public just hadn’t been told.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

9/10 In April 2025, the UK Supreme Court ruled that “sex” in the Equality Act means biological sex. The scaffolding collapsed. Much of Scotland’s guidance — on schools, crime, prisons — was now unlawful. And suddenly, silence.

@boswelltoday - boswelltoday

10/10 This wasn’t inclusion. It was deception. Rights were redefined through admin memos. The public was never asked. And now the courts have caught up, the façade is falling. Scotland was ground zero for self-ID by stealth.