Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

EHRC deletes single-sex space guidance amid trans rights legal case

37 replies

IwantToRetire · 16/10/2025 02:04

GUIDANCE alleged to have had a "devastating" impact on trans people has been removed by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).

The interim guidance, which faces an ongoing legal challenge from Good Law Project (GLP), was published after the Supreme Court's ruling that "woman" and "sex" in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex.

Just nine days after the ruling, the EHRC issued guidance stating that trans people could not use toilets which align with their acquired gender, but also that they could be excluded from using toilets which align with their birth sex if they look too much like the opposite gender.

It was removed on Wednesday, to be replaced by a statement which states: "The draft code was submitted to the Minister for Women and Equalities for approval on 4 September 2025. The next stage is for a draft code, as approved by her, to be laid before Parliament.

"On 15 October 2025, we [the EHRC] wrote to the minister to ask for: an update on that process; the revocation of the 2011 version of the code, as it is now out of date in various respects.

Full article at https://www.thenational.scot/news/25546244.ehrc-takes-devastating-guidance-trans-rights/ and at https://archive.is/XLlBG

Thread about EHRC letter at https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5428082-ehrc-letter-to-minister-for-women-and-equalities-about-government-action-on-our-draft-code-of-practice

UK rights watchdog deletes single-sex space guidance amid trans rights legal case

GUIDANCE alleged to have had a "devastating" impact on trans people has been removed by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) ...

https://www.thenational.scot/news/25546244.ehrc-takes-devastating-guidance-trans-rights/

OP posts:
LastTrainsEast · 16/10/2025 19:13

It can have no effect on the law.

'Impact assessment' is gibberish. Did the government say that or was that the product of the Guardian? They have long had a strained relationship with reality and the truth.

If you explained to someone in simple terms that a published math paper meant that 2+2 = 4 what kind of Impact assessment is even possible? What would it matter if 99% of people were affected by it.

There is no legal way out of applying the law here aside from completely rewriting it and that would face significant huddles.

GreenUp · 16/10/2025 18:58

@Easytoconfuse

More misleading reporting from Peter Walker at The Guardian.

Yesterday in the House of Lords - Baroness Falkner said the government had only asked for the Impact Assessment and other documents last Friday and that the documents had been sent to the government this Monday. So clearly the delay isn't caused by the EHRC.

https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/a9dbcc8c-20b4-4413-93a2-305467e8570e

Baroness Falkner speaks at 15:48.

The EHRC guidance and delay is discussed by the Lords from 15:38 onwards.

Supporterofwomensrights · 16/10/2025 18:40

I can't blame anyone for feeling cynical about this.

Original poster
IwantToRetire · 16/10/2025 18:15

RedToothBrush · 16/10/2025 14:28

The law still hasn't changed.

The lack of guidance means organisations are more likely to end up falling foul of the law one way or another and therefore its more likely that another case will end up back in court and the organisation will be found to be in the wrong.

Its a farce.

Farce yes - but also quite ominous as when published it was very much this is what you should do following the Supreme Court ruling.

Presumably thinking the Government would just nod it through.

What are organisations meant to do in the mean time.

Makes me feel they have withdrawn in because they are no longer confident if will be nodded through.

And if that is because the Government (under pressure from TRAs) are saying it leaves those with a GRC in limbo, then the answer isn't to withdraw the guidance for 99.9% of the country, but ammend the wording of the act which contradicts the court ruling.

Looks like we are in for a long fight to even get a Supreme Court judgement implemented because it supports women's sex based rights, and men (whether TRAs or MRAS) dont want women to have their rights as women upheld by the legal system.

OP posts:
Easytoconfuse · 16/10/2025 14:53

SamphiretheTervosaur · 16/10/2025 14:46

An impact assessment?

The SC did that

Each organisation will do that for its specific situation - this is what "case by case" actually means

What would the EHRC assess?

That's what I thought.

SamphiretheTervosaur · 16/10/2025 14:46

An impact assessment?

The SC did that

Each organisation will do that for its specific situation - this is what "case by case" actually means

What would the EHRC assess?

RedToothBrush · 16/10/2025 14:28

The law still hasn't changed.

The lack of guidance means organisations are more likely to end up falling foul of the law one way or another and therefore its more likely that another case will end up back in court and the organisation will be found to be in the wrong.

Its a farce.

Imnobody4 · 16/10/2025 13:41

Hasn't the guidance been removed because it will be altered following the consultation. The next stage is approval of the final guidance not another consultation.

The EHRC has also removed the interim update from its website that was published after the Supreme Court's judgment. Duty-bearers should continue to take specialist legal advice, as they did before, on what they need to do under equality and human rights law. They should use the new code once Parliament has approved it.

theilltemperedmaggotintheheartofthelaw · 16/10/2025 09:34

Deleting the interim guidance looks petty. Next month's Judicial Review hearing can still go ahead based on it. And it's needed - the 2011 guidance is now worse than useless.

Does anyone know how usual it is for a Minister to take so long to lay open draft statutory guidance once it's been prepared? I'd got the distinct impression from previous press reports that this was a formality. But now it looks as if the ministry can take any amount of time, havering about impact assessments and hawking it around for input from interested parties (including the legislatures of the other home nations, one of which was the losing party!).

Didn't we already have the consultation?

deadpan · 16/10/2025 07:51

The devastation only seems to go one way.

MistyGreenAndBlue · 16/10/2025 02:12

None of this changes the law

Swipe left for the next trending thread