JK Rowling has once again entered the political spotlight, this time by publicly offering to bankroll lawsuits from women incarcerated in facilities that also house transgender women. The controversial author, whose advocacy against trans inclusion in women’s spaces has drawn criticism from LGBTQ+ communities worldwide, made the pledge as part of an emerging wave of potential legal actions against the Scottish Prison Service (SPS).
Convicted murderer Jane Sutherley is at the center of this latest controversy, claiming her human rights were violated when she was housed alongside transgender women during her incarceration. Sutherley, recently acquitted of a reported campaign of harassment against two fellow prisoners, trans woman Alexandra Stewart and her partner Nyomi Fee, is now reportedly seeking legal advice to sue the SPS.
Rowling’s promise to fund these lawsuits is consistent with her stance on what she refers to as “women’s rights,” a term critics say she frequently deploys to target and exclude transgender people, particularly trans women. In a statement featured on her recently launched website for the JK Rowling Women’s Fund, she claimed:
“Women being locked up with men is a human rights violation. Vulnerable women being forced to agree that a man is a woman is a human rights violation.”
But for many in the transgender community and their allies, the rhetoric is familiar and deeply harmful.
A Pattern of Dehumanization Disguised as Advocacy
Rowling’s framing of transgender women as “men,” regardless of legal or medical transition, continues to misrepresent a complex and medically recognized process of gender identity. According to the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), gender-affirming care, including legal recognition of gender and access to appropriate facilities, is critical to the mental and physical health of trans people. Denying this care has been shown to significantly increase the risk of depression, self-harm, and suicide.
The suggestion that transgender women are inherently a danger to cisgender women perpetuates a narrative rooted in fear, not fact. Multiple studies, including those by the UCLA Williams Institute, show no evidence that trans-inclusive policies in prisons or public accommodations increase harm to cisgender women. What they do highlight is that transgender people, particularly trans women of color, face disproportionate violence and sexual assault while incarcerated, especially when housed according to their sex assigned at birth.
Weaponizing the Legal System
The push for legal action, now backed by Rowling’s considerable fortune, mirrors a broader international trend of using the courts to roll back trans rights. Groups like “For Women Scotland,” which recently won a legal challenge against the Scottish Government over gender policy, have been instrumental in coordinating these efforts.
Susan Smith, a spokesperson for the group, warned that SPS policies could leave the government liable for “hundreds” of lawsuits. Yet missing from this narrative is any mention of the impact these policy changes and the hostile climate they encourage have on transgender inmates, many of whom already face severe isolation and violence.
While the SPS has stated that transgender prisoners undergo individualized assessments and are not placed in women’s facilities if they pose a risk, critics like Rowling and Smith continue to conflate all trans women with danger, regardless of their personal history or conduct.
“We ensure that any transgender woman with a history of violence against women and girls, who presents a risk to women and girls, will not be placed in the women’s estate,” an SPS spokesperson reiterated. The service also noted it is reviewing its policies in light of a recent Supreme Court judgment.
Who Is Protected and Who Is Targeted?
For trans rights advocates, the concern is not simply about prison housing policies; it’s about the bigger picture. “When you fund lawsuits to define an entire group of people out of legal protection,” says one UK-based trans rights attorney, “you aren’t defending human rights. You’re erasing them.”
By backing legal campaigns that seek to redefine trans women as men in the eyes of the law, Rowling and her allies are not protecting vulnerable women; they are scapegoating an already vulnerable population. Trans women, especially those behind bars, face higher rates of sexual violence, mental illness, and lack of medical care. Suits that erase their identities don’t improve safety. They increase suffering.
What’s more, the narrative advanced by Rowling’s fund ignores the real complexities of carceral justice, including how systemic failures affect all incarcerated women, cis and trans alike.
The Real Cost
Beyond the legal fees Rowling is ready to bankroll, the larger cost may be measured in lives. Already facing rising hate crimes, limited healthcare access, and mounting political attacks, the UK’s transgender population now sees a wealthy celebrity using her platform to fund lawsuits that further stigmatize them.
As one advocate put it bluntly, “She’s not helping women. She’s hurting all of us.”
Whether these lawsuits succeed or not, their very existence sends a chilling message: that transgender people, especially the most marginalized, can be debated, litigated, and erased from public life. And that’s something no amount of magical thinking can justify.
