On December 29, 2025, staff at a JD Wetherspoon pub in Edinburgh refused to serve members of the gender-critical group, For Women Scotland, as they celebrated a significant ruling from the Supreme Court. The incident occurred after the co-leaders of the group, Susan Smith and Marion Calder, visited the establishment following a judgment that defined the term “woman” as based on biological sex.
The two campaigners were recognized by staff at the pub, leading to the refusal of service. Ms. Calder, a 54-year-old NHS worker, reached out to a local journalist to report the incident, saying, “you’ll never guess what’s happened here at Spoons.” After the staff’s departure, they were able to continue their gathering and order drinks from another source.
In response to the situation, Tim Martin, founder and chairman of Wetherspoon, characterized the staff’s actions as an “initial hiccup.” He expressed support for the right of patrons to celebrate a legal victory in a pub setting, adding, “If you win a court case, especially a Supreme Court case, you would expect to be allowed to celebrate in a pub.”
Implications of the Supreme Court Ruling
The Supreme Court’s decision, delivered in April 2025, confirmed that the terms “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act refer specifically to biological sex. This ruling has significant implications for women’s rights and access to single-sex spaces, such as changing rooms and hospital wards. Despite this clarity, the Labour government, led by Bridget Phillipson, Secretary of State for Women and Equalities, has delayed the release of new guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) on implementing the ruling.
Ms. Phillipson has publicly expressed concerns about the proposed guidance, describing it as “trans-exclusive” and suggesting that it could lead to unintended consequences, such as restricting mothers from bringing their infant sons into female changing areas. This reluctance to endorse the guidance raises questions about how public bodies and businesses will navigate the ruling in practice.
Ongoing Controversies and Legal Challenges
The atmosphere surrounding women’s rights in the UK remains contentious. Earlier in December 2025, Ms. Calder criticized the Labour leadership for failing to address women’s rights adequately after an employment tribunal ruled that a health authority had harassed nurse Sandie Peggie. The tribunal’s dismissal of some of Ms. Peggie’s claims, while upholding others, has drawn criticism from women’s rights advocates who argue it conflicts with the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Ms. Calder remarked that the tribunal’s decision could discourage women from pursuing similar legal actions, stating, “This does go against our ruling at the Supreme Court, and it does appear that this tribunal… was trying to rework our case, which is astonishing.” She called on Labour leaders, including Ms. Phillipson and party leader Keir Starmer, to demonstrate leadership on this issue, emphasizing the need for clarity and support for women’s rights in light of ongoing legal battles.
As the debate continues, the lack of clear guidance from the government leaves many public bodies uncertain about how to implement the Supreme Court’s ruling. Until the EHRC guidance is finalized, the policies regarding single-sex spaces remain inconsistent across various institutions. The ongoing discourse reflects a broader societal struggle over gender identity and women’s rights, with significant implications for both policy and public sentiment.
