Just days before this weekend’s Pride parade in Northumbria in Northern England, a judge ruled that the local police department’s chief constable wrongfully allowed uniformed officers to march under a Progress Pride flag at last year’s celebration.

In a controversial decision critics say is riven with bias, the judge claimed officers marching with the flag breached their duty to impartiality and endangered imagined protesters with “gender critical” views.

Related

20 police raided a gay bar for a “compliance check.” Then the patrons did something surprising.
QBurgh described the moment as one of “resistance, solidarity, and improvisational beauty”

The judicial review was brought by a female event participant who objected to police officers “associating with messaging which was supportive of the cause of gender ideology,” The Times of London reported.

Never Miss a Beat

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay ahead of the latest LGBTQ+ political news and insights.
Subscribe to our Newsletter today

In her challenge, plaintiff Lindsey Smith highlighted a decision to allow officers to station a police van decorated in colors “indicative of support for the cause of gender ideology… namely the colors of the Progress flag.”

The “messaging which was supportive of the cause of gender ideology, including in the form of placards, chanting, imagery or flags,” was a threat to her personal safety, she said.

The judge in the case, Mr. Justice Linden, agreed, ruling it was “contrary to the uniformed officers’ duties of impartiality”, as well as the chief constable’s “own duty of impartiality, to participate in the 2024 march in the way that they did.”

“The fact that they wore their uniforms, marched as a contingent and carried the Police Pride and other flags demonstrated their support for the cause as police officers,” the judge said, and by extension indicated hostility to those with “gender critical” views.

“It is not hard to imagine circumstances in which officers in question might be called on to deal with a clash between gender critical people and supporters of gender ideology, and therefore situations where the former had cause for concern as to whether they were being dealt with impartially,” the judge wrote.

The judge implied this “perceived” bias would influence officers’ decisions to permit “gender critical” people to demonstrate at all and could result in attempts to “eject a gender critical person from the march.”

Smith’s lawyer, Paul Conrathe, said the ruling was of “national importance.”

Referring to so-called “gender ideology,” Smith said British police “must be above the fray and avoid taking sides” on what he called “contested issues.”

Northumbria police responded that their “primary aim” during last year’s march was “to keep people safe.” The event also provided the force “with an opportunity to engage with people including those who may have less confidence in policing,” they said following the ruling.

The department added that senior Northumbria officers would “work through the ruling to understand the implications.” They did not clarify whether officers would be allowed to march in the Pride parade this weekend.

Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.