In a historic ruling last week, judges at the UK\u2019s highest court ruled that the legal definition of a woman is based on biological sex and that transgender women do not fall within that legal definition under equality law.<\/p>\n
The UK government welcomed the ruling for bringing \u201cclarity and confidence\u201d for women and service providers, including those who run sports clubs, according to a government spokesperson. The ruling means single-sex services can exclude trans women.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe initial reaction to the judgement from most commentators was \u2018that\u2019s that, then\u2019 for trans women and sport, and that was what the anti-trans groups were briefing,\u201d Natalie Washington, the lead organiser of the Football v Transphobia campaign, told The Athletic.<\/p>\n
\u201cBut I think as the dust has settled, it doesn\u2019t seem quite as clear-cut as that.\u201d<\/p>\n
What is the potential impact of the ruling on women\u2019s sport in the UK? The Athletic looks at what the ruling said and its potential short- and long-term impact on women\u2019s sport in the UK.<\/p>\n
What was the Supreme Court\u2019s ruling?<\/p>\n
Five Supreme Court judges determined that the \u201cconcept of sex is binary\u201d and that a person with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) \u2014 a formal document giving legal recognition of someone\u2019s new gender \u2014 in the female gender \u201cdoes not come with the definition of a woman\u201d.<\/p>\n
The case against the devolved Scottish government, brought about by campaigners For Women Scotland (FWS), asked the Supreme Court to determine what the law meant by \u201csex\u201d, given that the Scottish government had argued the 2004 Gender Recognition Act defines it as \u201ccertificated sex\u201d.<\/p>\n
The judgment, issued over 88 pages, was limited to the precise interpretation of the equality legislation, the 2010 Equality Act, which applies to the UK, not just Scotland, and is designed to prevent various forms of discrimination, but provides an exemption allowing competitors to be excluded from a \u201cgender-affected\u201d sport or activity based on their sex under section 195.<\/p>\n
In their ruling, the judges stated they were not commenting more broadly on whether trans women are women, adding it was not the role of the court to adjudicate on the meaning of gender or sex.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe unanimous decision of this court is that the terms woman and sex in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex,\u201d Judge Lord Hodge told the court. \u201cRead fairly and in context, the provisions relating to single-sex services can only be interpreted by reference to biological sex,\u201d the judges said.<\/p>\n
When announcing the ruling, Judge Lord Hodge stated it should not be taken as a triumph for one group in society.<\/p>\n
\nJudgment has been given this morning in the matter of For Women Scotland Ltd (Appellant) v The Scottish Ministers (Respondent) UKSC 2024\/0042: https:\/\/t.co\/QGmrliNOsG<\/a> pic.twitter.com\/f2qlAD2JMV<\/a><\/p>\n
\u2014 UK Supreme Court (@UKSupremeCourt) April 16, 2025<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
The decision arrives amid intense public debate over the intersection of transgender rights and women\u2019s rights, particularly in the women\u2019s sport arena.<\/p>\n
However, not everyone agrees that the ruling clearly defines biological sex.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe court made no effort to define biological sex, and that is a problem,\u201d Washington says. \u201cFor example, it appears to say that it is legal to exclude a trans man from men\u2019s sport on account of his biology, but it is also legal to exclude them from women\u2019s sport as they have masculinised their appearance.<\/p>\n
\u201cFrom an equality point of view, it does not seem right that someone can be excluded from both men\u2019s and women\u2019s sport. And this is the central principle of the Gender Recognition Act 2004, which came about because the British government lost a legal challenge at the European Court of Human Rights. It is a breach of human rights to leave people between genders. So I would expect the treatment of trans men to end up in the courts.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe failure to define biological sex is also problematic when you think of women with disorders of sexual development. Intersex people make up less than three per cent of the UK population but that is a significant number of people who could end up excluded from sport. And when you think about athletics, could this hinder our chances of staging international events?\u201d<\/p>\n
Does the ruling immediately change anything?<\/p>\n
Governing bodies of sport in the UK will not be mandated to amend or reconsider their rules on eligibility immediately given the new ruling.<\/p>\n
Rather, given its recency and weight, the ruling is expected to influence policy-making in the future, with the nuances of implementation still needing to be considered.<\/p>\n
\u201cMost sports in the UK already had policies that said it was legal to exclude trans people from sport,\u201d Washington says. \u201cNow we\u2019re just waiting to see what football and cricket, which allow trans women to play in women\u2019s competitions at the grassroots level, do with their rules. So you could argue that not much has changed.\u201d<\/p>\n
However, it is expected that at grassroots level, changes will be felt more broadly and with more speed than at elite level, particularly in regard to the use of shared spaces such as changing rooms and toilets.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt will also be interesting to see what happens to what has been a growing grassroots scene for mixed, inclusive, \u2018don\u2019t ask\u2019 competition,\u201d Washington says. \u201cIt\u2019s popular in roller derby, but there are also examples in football and rugby.\u201d<\/p>\n
What are the rules on transgender women in sport?<\/p>\n
There is no set rule on transgender women in sport. However, many governing bodies in the UK have already implemented restrictions on the inclusion of transgender athletes in sport in recent years.<\/p>\n
World Athletics, British Cycling and swimming\u2019s global governing body FINA were some of the first governing bodies to update eligibility policies, outright banning transgender women from taking part in women\u2019s events.<\/p>\n
In 2022, British Triathlon became the first British sporting body to establish an open category in which transgender athletes can compete.<\/p>\n
In August 2023, British Rowing followed suit by announcing that transgender women would not be permitted to compete in the women\u2019s category at its events, followed swiftly by Rugby Football Union (RFU) and UK Athletics, which had previously allowed transgender women to compete in female categories if they met testosterone requirements.<\/p>\n
The Lawn Tennis Association (LTA), the national governing body of tennis in the UK, has no control over policies for Wimbledon, Queen\u2019s or any other ATP, WTA or ITF tournament played in the UK. However, it does restrict trans women and non-binary individuals assigned male at birth from playing in the women\u2019s category in National Championships through to local county and district leagues.<\/p>\n
Earlier this month, the Football Association, English football\u2019s governing body, updated its policy<\/a> around transgender athletes competing in all levels of women\u2019s football, from grassroots through to the top-tier Women\u2019s Super League, introducing stricter eligibility criteria for transgender women and non-binary players in the women\u2019s game. A new formal process will give the governing body \u201cultimate discretion\u201d over eligibility for transgender women and non-binary players to play in the women\u2019s game. Any decisions will be managed on a \u201ccase-by-case basis\u201d.<\/p>\n
England Hockey has updated its trans and non-binary participation policy<\/a> with the creation of a female category for \u201cparticipants recorded female at birth, which includes trans men not undergoing hormone treatment\u201d and an open category for all, which will come into effect in September 2025.<\/p>\n
In 2011, FIFA issued gender-verification regulations that did not set testosterone levels. In 2022, soccer\u2019s governing body said it was reviewing its policy.<\/p>\n
What has been the reaction to the ruling?<\/p>\n
Pride Sport UK was among several organisations to say they were \u201cdeeply shocked\u201d by the ruling and needed time to assess its implications.<\/p>\n
In a joint statement, LEAP Sports \u2014 a Scottish-based LGBTIQ+ sports charity \u2014 Pride Sports and Pride Sports Cymru said: \u201cWe are concerned about the potential implications for trans people across the sport and physical activity sector and need some time to give these our full consideration.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn the meantime, we remain committed to ensuring trans people access the life-saving benefits of sport and physical activity and will continue to work together towards a UK sector in which we are all able to be ourselves; respected, valued and supported to achieve our best.\u201d<\/p>\n
Mara Yamauchi, Sex Matters advisory group member and two-time Olympian for Team GB, told The Athletic: \u201cThe UK Supreme Court judgment was unequivocal and unanimous: a woman is a biological female. Sex is about your body, not certificates. It is binary \u2014 male or female. The Equality Act 2010 section 195 is also very clear that where a sport is sex-affected, single-sex sport is permitted. In other words, a female category for females only is permitted at all levels to enable fair and safe sport for all.<\/p>\n
\u201cSo all the national governing bodies and sports organisations which currently allow males in the female category at any level will have to rewrite their policies. Those organisations which already have rules stating that their female categories are for females only will, if males are still competing in them, have to take swift, robust action to exclude those males. Organisations which fail to do this will face legal action, which they will lose.\u201d<\/p>\n
On Sunday, Manchester City Women player Kerstin Casparij kissed a wristband in the colour of trans rights after scoring against Everton in the Women\u2019s Super League.<\/p>\n
\nKerstin Casparij kissing her trans flag armband after her goal \ud83e\ude75\ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200d\u26a7\ufe0f pic.twitter.com\/m2e8Zx7OL4<\/a><\/p>\n
\u2014 \ud83d\udc83 (@insidemcwfc) April 20, 2025<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Washington is most concerned with the impact the ruling will have on increased abuse and harassment.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt happens whenever there is a policy change like this, and it\u2019s already started to happen this week,\u201d Washington says. \u201cEvery transphobe is emboldened and things can get pretty toxic. So, my worry is that trans people will just decide sport is not for them and we will end up with a group of people who are less active, less fit and less happy.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Football Association has said there are 20 trans women registered to participate in amateur football in England while the most recent census, in 2021, states there are 260,000 trans people in total in the United Kingdom.<\/p>\n