Good Law Project suing the EHRC and Bridget Phillipson - letter before action

[OhBuggerandArse]

Sorry if this has already been shared - here are the links to their letter and statement. Looking forward to the Mumsnet analysis :-)

https://goodlawproject.org/were-bringing-a-legal-challenge-to-the-ehrcs-interim-update

https://goodlawproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Letter-to-the-Equality-and-Human-Rights-Commission-16-May-2025_Redacted.pdf

He has got into the habit of starting the crowdfunder immediately after he's sent the letter before action, so we can see his side of the story but we don't see a reply from the respondent saying "Dear Jolyon, thank you for your letter of 23rd ult., we have examined your complaint and for XYZ reasons we find it to be a load of bollocks."

I don't suppose that breaches any rules, but it feels like sharp practice.

But he's brought in the big bucks with his nonspecific Trans Rights Fighting Fund, which doesn't have a respondent or litigation strategy attached. His projection stunt looks like literally spaffing money up the wall, but I suppose he feels that if he stages stunts demonstrating his allyship, the trans community will be happy with that.

Maybe he's right, but the trans community do have a habit of demanding the moon and getting very angry when they don't get it. If Jolyon leads them to believe he's going to overturn the SC ruling, they'll expect him to do it.

I might quite like an Adult Human Email tshirt.

• Short
• Direct
• Nevertheless can sometimes be misinterpreted.

I liked how even his own video of the projection stunt showed people just walking past uninterested. Great impact there, Jolyon.

@SionnachRuadh I think the ire will only turn on Jolyon when he gives up. As long as he keeps trying they'll keep believing that it's him against the transpohobic world and the accumulated losses are due to biases beyond his control.

Letter reported in the Telegraph
www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/acdb4ba5fbfc3a0d

@KnottyAuty I really like his engaging with the pig analogy. Except I think we are the pig enjoying the shit now. They wanted no debate which left no avenue other than a steady drip of legal cases. Now they are complaining they weren't consulted. How do you consult with the movement that modelled itself as an immovable object and an irresistible force. Now that they are forced to engage, we are the all powerful pig.

Love the letter before claim as per the Telegraph article. To summarise 'Bridget Philipson breaks law by stating law'.

And I don't honestly think there's anything anyone could do to help with that.

WorriedMutha · Today 09:56

Love the letter before claim as per the Telegraph article. To summarise 'Bridget Philipson breaks law by stating law'.

I know, try twisting your biscuit round that one. His claim is utterly illogical.

From the telegraph article:

Jolyon Maugham, Good Law Project founder, said: “The stark and needlessly cruel position adopted by the Government and the EHRC humiliates trans people by forcing them to use the wrong toilets and obliges them to reveal deeply personal information about their gender to complete strangers just to take a wee.

Oh Jolyon, everyone knows what sex people are.

and as for their strategy of fielding a person they refer to as ‘interesex’ and asking what toilets they should use….man alive

I don’t understand why that thread was deleted. The letter is genuine and the OP was critical of it. From memory it was someone else other than the OP talking about different accounts but I can’t quite remember.

And Carole Hooven has tweeted about how one of its signatories has previously written about how sex is binary, demonstrating that people sign this sort of thing out of fear of being perceived the wrong way:

https://x.com/hoovlet/status/1923775918150930869

I’m torn between thinking JM is doing our job for us and wishing the media would just ignore him.

As for which toilet people with DSDs should use, that would be the correct one for their sex.

Well the GLP stunts are in our interest. Failing to challenge the judgement successfully will only strengthen it. Popcorn futures are bright too.

Translucent is also launching some kind of legal challenge against the EHRC for bias only they are using decent lawyers Leigh Day who have won a lot of human rights cases and they are also trying to crowdfund. I don't think they will get anywhere dramatic, but they have way more chance than the GLP does simply by using competent lawyers and not going after the Supreme Court.

The GLP is great at publicity stunts so they are getting whatever cash they can which could get spent in worse ways. The Translucent fund started May 15 and has yet to reach 4000.

Surely Jolly thinks that he's the wisest person he knows?

The OP was a troll. See the screenshot on the Site Stuff link below.
Be careful - apparently if you click on a google document and have a google account, the creator of the document can see your details. Given how dangerous to women and children some transactivists are, women need to be cautious in terms of their internet security.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/5336710-google-docs-in-troll-posts

Given that a lot of TRAs do not appear to be gainfully employed (or employable), where is all this money coming from?

Thanks, that’s interesting. But the letter and its signatories are real. I’ll ask MNHQ to remove the Google link but keep the criticism of it from Carole Hooven.

Interested to see that the Good Law Project are fundraising is to:
“challenge the Supreme Court’s judgment on trans rights”

But in the details they say:
“legal case against equalities minister, Bridget Phillipson”

The text isn’t really clear about what specific legal issues are being contested other than opposing the acknowledgement of biological sex in law - because that causes “anguish” for trans people. They are repeating the assertion that the SC didn’t hear from any trans people (despite trans people have an entire government represent their case). And the pre-action letter is all about workplace toilets for those with a GRC - which isn’t spelled out on the funding page (and tbh is bloody hard work trying to figure that out from the letter itself - has obfuscation been used tactically to hide that they’re not advocating for self ID?)

I really want to know what court is going to hear a case where the respondent is the supreme court

Am now picturing Jolyon as Rick Moranis in Spaceballs

"The Supreme Court isn't senior enough - we have to go to the Ludicrous Court"

Go us!

Am now picturing Jolyon as Rick Moranis in Spaceballs

Or in "Honey, I transed Shrunk the Kids"

An intersex claimant will also require the minister and the EHRC to explain what lavatories these people should use.

If they can't use male or female because they are some kind of 'other' sex, what facilities were they using before the SC ruling?

Cherry picked their trans women for that video didn't they?

Bit hypocritical of GLP really to decide who does and does not get to speak given their whole complaint is that trans people weren't heard by the SC.

I urge the GLP to do the right thing and represent the full diversity of trans women.

Perhaps someone should help them regain balance by projecting publicly available footage of how some trans women behave at feminist events or the statements some trans thought leaders have made about what it is to be a woman.

Cherry picked their trans women for that video didn't they?

Mmn. Would be so easy to do the same with the opposite bias: the court pictures line up alone would do it.

But even the really pretty men are still men, and women are entitled to men-free spaces. That this fucks men off is irrelevant, unless you're a raging misogynist who thinks entitlement to female biology is a birthright of males.

In which case wtf is all the stuff about changing sex/more than two sexes about?

I'd say make it make sense but all the clownfish/sex/chromosome/it's complicated burble is only ever to force the submission of women to men using them in their spaces. There is never anything more than this.

There is no human right anywhere for men to have access to non consenting women. That's an incel fantasy.

It also doesn't matter how many sad men you line up to look tragic and have problems, women still have rights in law. That men's feelings should destroy inconvenient women's rights is another incel fantasy.