For those who don't know, the job of GBNews is to spread divisive, racist, dishonest, misleading and hate-inducing claims that support the far right and the .1%.

What they're doing in this case is claiming that the non-descriminiation legislation will descriminate against white men. Anyone paying attention will know that the anti-descrimination legislation is designed to prohibit decrimination against everyone (including white men). Moreover, it has not and should never result in longer sentences for white men. More info here (fron online discussions):

The X post claims the British Sentencing Council decided white men will get longer prison sentences than women and ethnic minorities starting Tuesday, March 31, 2025. This seems likely based on new guidelines, but it's a debated interpretation, not a direct policy. Keep in mind that this is not a direct policy.

GBNews and Xitter far right influencers, others suggest the guidelines aim to reduce sentencing disparities for ethnic minorities and women, potentially leading to relatively longer sentences for white men compared to these groups for similar offenses. Keep in mind that this is not the RESULT, it is ONLY a claim, that has no effective basis.

The issue is controversial, with politicians and the public divided on whether it creates a "two-tier justice" system, sparking significant debate. In fact, the two-tier justice system is officially the righ vs poor justice systems. Anti-descrimination legislation is designed to do the opposite: putting all defendants at the same level of justice.

The X post from Visegrád 24 (a far right influencer), dated March 29, 2025, references a decision by the British Sentencing Council, claiming it will lead to white men receiving longer prison sentences than women and ethnic minorities starting the following Tuesday. This claim is tied to new sentencing guidelines effective April 1, 2025, which have sparked a political and public controversy known as the "two-tier justice row." (Visegrád 24 is spreading misinformation because this is merely his interpretation of what might happen, it's not factual.)

The Sentencing Council's guidelines, published on March 4, 2025, emphasize the use of pre-sentence reports (PSRs) for certain cohorts, including ethnic minorities, cultural minorities, faith minorities, young adults, women, and pregnant or post-natal offenders. The goal is to ensure courts have comprehensive information about offenders' circumstances to address existing disparities, as ethnic minorities have historically received longer sentences on average than white offenders (Sentencing Council publishes comprehensive new guidance: https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/news/item/sentencing-council-publishes-comprehensive-new-guidance-on-imposing-community-and-custodial-sentences).

The guidelines do not explicitly state that white men will get longer sentences; it's a false implication based on how sentencing might play out. This interpretation has led to accusations of bias, with far right politicians like Robert Jenrick claiming it disadvantages white men (Tories urge justice secretary to reverse 'two-tier' sentencing changes).

Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood has expressed displeasure, ordering a review of the Sentencing Council's powers, arguing against differential treatment based on ethnicity or religion (Mahmood to review Sentencing Council’s powers). The Sentencing Council, led by Lord Justice William Davis, defends the guidelines, stating they aim to correct disparities and were developed over three years with input from ministers, who raised no concerns initially (Sentencing Council defends changes after 'two-tier' row).

An unexpected aspect is the constitutional tension: the Sentencing Council's independence is being challenged, with potential legal battles over whether the government can override the guidelines, highlighting a clash between judicial autonomy and political oversight ('Two-tier' justice row: Sentencing Council rejects minister's call for guidance rethink).

TL:DR GBNews are always lying to you. There will likely be a review of a recent anti-descrimination law, so that it will do what it promises to do: reduce decrimination in the court system.