Legal experts in Scotland have called out First Minister John Swinney for claiming he cannot discuss the ongoing court fight with For Women Scotland over transgender prisoners. This challenge came after Swinney refused to comment during a recent radio interview, citing contempt of court rules that experts say he has misunderstood.
The dispute centers on whether biologically male inmates who identify as women should stay in female prisons, a policy the Scottish Government plans to defend in court despite a key Supreme Court ruling this year.
The Ongoing Legal Fight
For Women Scotland, a group pushing for women’s rights based on biological sex, has taken the Scottish Government to court for the third time. They argue that current rules on housing transgender prisoners break the Equality Act 2010, especially after the Supreme Court decided in April 2025 that the law defines a woman by biological sex.
This latest case hit the Court of Session last week. It focuses on guidance for the Scottish Prison Service about placing transgender inmates. The group says the policy still allows men into women’s jails, putting female prisoners at risk. A full hearing could come later this year, adding to the pressure on the government.
Experts point out that while the case is active, it is a civil matter, not criminal. This means public figures like Swinney can speak on policy without breaking rules, as long as they avoid influencing the judge directly.
Why Swinney Stayed Silent
During an LBC interview on Thursday, Swinney dodged questions about why his administration keeps fighting the case. He called it a live legal issue and said he would not comment. This stance drew quick backlash from legal voices who say ministers often hide behind such claims to avoid tough talks.
Scott Wortley, a lecturer at Edinburgh Law School, noted that officials routinely discuss ongoing cases in broad terms. He suggested Swinney’s refusal looks like a dodge rather than a legal must. Murray Foote, a former SNP executive, referenced the 2008 Judiciary Act, which bars influencing judges but allows general policy chats.
Swinney’s team has spent over 600,000 pounds on previous losses to For Women Scotland, and they have not paid the full bill yet. Critics call this a waste of taxpayer money, especially with public services under strain.
Previous Battles and Costs
For Women Scotland has won big before against the government on gender issues. Here is a quick look at key past cases:
- First case in 2021: Challenged guidance on gender self-identification in public bodies. Court ruled in favor of FWS, clarifying sex-based protections.
- Second case in 2022: Focused on single-sex spaces. Government lost again, leading to policy tweaks but not full changes.
- Supreme Court appeal in April 2025: Upheld biological definition of woman, forcing updates across Scotland like in NHS boards.
These fights have cost the public purse dearly. Below is a table showing estimated expenses from the disputes so far:
| Case Year | Description | Government Cost (GBP) | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Public body guidance | ~250,000 | FWS Win |
| 2022 | Single-sex spaces | ~200,000 | FWS Win |
| 2025 | Supreme Court ruling | ~150,000+ | FWS Win |
| Current | Prison policy | Ongoing, est. 100,000 | Pending |
The table highlights how repeated defeats add up, with no clear end in sight for the prison policy challenge.
SNP’s Broader Trans Rights Stance
The Scottish National Party under Swinney faces heat for sticking to trans-inclusive policies amid shifting public views. Earlier this year, after the Supreme Court win for FWS, Swinney said he accepted the ruling but stressed balancing rights. Yet, prisons remain a flashpoint, with reports of male inmates in female facilities despite risks.
This echoes past SNP moves, like the blocked Gender Recognition Reform Bill in 2022, which aimed to ease legal gender changes. Swinney has ruled out quick tax hikes before the 2026 Holyrood election, but critics link his caution on finances to bold spending on legal defenses. Recent events, such as Police Scotland dropping a case against FWS over a protest umbrella, show growing scrutiny on how authorities handle gender debates.
Public opinion polls from late 2025 show most Scots back single-sex spaces in prisons and sports, tying into wider talks on safety for vulnerable women. Swinney’s silence risks alienating voters who see it as ignoring women’s concerns.
Reactions from Public and Politicians
Online forums buzz with mixed views. Some praise FWS for protecting female inmates, while others worry about trans rights setbacks. Political rivals, like Scottish Conservatives, slam Swinney as cowardly for not engaging. Even within the SNP, whispers grow about the party’s image on women’s issues.
One author called Swinney a hypocrite for defending trans placements while claiming to value safety. Protests outside Parliament earlier this year drew hundreds, with clashes highlighting deep divides. As the case heats up, it could shape SNP’s path to the next election.
This debate touches real lives, from prisoners’ safety to policy fairness. Readers, what do you think about balancing these rights? Share your views in the comments and spread the word to keep the conversation going.
