The Supreme Court has blocked gender-neutral passports.
Christie Elan-Cane said the application process breaches human rights laws by not allowing an “X” option to be displayed on the passports.
But the court said applicants’ gender was “a biographical detail which can be used to confirm their identity”.
Christie Elan-Cane has now said the case will now go to the European Court of Human Rights.
The campaigner, who has called for legal recognition of non-gendered identity for decades, said on Twitter that the “UK government and judicial system are on the wrong side of history” and “this is not the end”.
Countries that issue gender-neutral passports are Argentina, Australia, the US, Canada, Denmark, India, Malta, Nepal, the Netherlands, New Zealand and Pakistan, while Germany has introduced an intersex category.
Lord Reed, president of the Supreme Court, said in the ruling that gender could be checked against birth, adoption or gender recognition certificates as part of confirming an applicant’s identity.
“It is therefore the gender recognised for legal purposes and recorded in those documents which is relevant,” he said.
He said Christie Elan-Cane’s interest in having an “X” passport was outweighed by other considerations, including “maintaining a coherent approach across government”.
“There is no legislation in the United Kingdom which recognises a non-gendered category of individuals,” he said.
He said legislation “across the statute book” assumes all people can be categorised in two sexes or genders – “terms which have been used interchangeably”.
Editor-in-Chief | Carl D. Pearson has been involved in British politics and media from an early age, with the key knowledge of what it takes to run a news organisation for the 21st century. Mr Pearson, as Editor-in-chief, is responsible for supervising the daily tasks of publishing media and content to UNN’s website and various platforms.
[sibwp_form id=4]
