Ryan Castellucci, an American cybersecurity expert, has brought legal action against the UK government after the Gender Recognition Panel (GRP) recorded their gender identity as “not specified,” leaving them in legal limbo. Castellucci has obtained legal recognition of being non-binary on their official documents in California, including their birth certificate and driving license, but the UK government does not legally recognize non-binary identities.
Under the 2004 Gender Recognition Act, individuals who moved to the UK from abroad can apply for a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) if they have already changed their gender under the law of an approved country or territory. While California, along with most US states, is on the approved list, Castellucci has been struggling to obtain a GRC in the UK due to the government’s lack of recognition of non-binary identities.
Despite running into trouble with the GRP, Judge Paula Gray approved Castellucci’s application on the basis of their legal recognition as non-binary in California. However, Gray also told Castellucci that while “not specified” could be listed on their GRC, they could not confirm the legal implications of this given the government’s view on gender.
As a result, Castellucci has been left in legal limbo, unsure of their legal gender in the UK. They have been advised that they can freely choose between male and female on forms, but neither option is correct. Castellucci stated that the government has created a complex situation by maintaining the status quo, rather than avoiding one.
Castellucci has taken legal action against the GRP and the Secretary of State for Justice, Dominic Raab, arguing that the panel breached its duty to provide them with a GRC that matches their non-binary identity. The law firm Leigh Day is supporting Castellucci’s case, stating that it is unfair and illogical for someone legally recognized as non-binary in one country to be forced to choose between male and female in the UK or be given a third “not specified” option with no legal meaning.
The case highlights the UK government’s failure to legally recognize non-binary identities and the challenges that non-binary individuals face in obtaining legal recognition of their gender identity. It also underscores the need for greater legal protection and recognition of the rights of the LGBTQ+ community in the UK.