EHRC says people could be asked for birth certificates to prove biological sex
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has published its draft guidance following the Supreme Court's ruling last month.
The code of practice, which is out for public consultation for six weeks, covers a range of topics including trans people's participation in sport and use of toilets.
The commission has tripled the length of time for feedback, from an original proposal of two weeks, meaning it is expected to be presented to women and equalities minister Bridget Phillipson in July rather than June.
The regulator said the consultation has been extended 'in light of the level of public interest, as well as representations from stakeholders in Parliament and civil society'.
Equality and Human Rights Commission chairwoman Baroness Falkner said it is important the code is 'an accurate interpretation of the law'(David Jones/PA)
In the wake of April's Supreme Court ruling that the words 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex, the commission had issued interim guidance, saying trans women 'should not be permitted to use the women's facilities' in workplaces or public-facing services like shops and hospitals, with the same applying for trans men using men's toilets.
More detailed draft guidance was published on Tuesday, with a consultation period running until June 30, as the regulator appealed for feedback as to whether its content 'could be clearer or more helpful'.
The guidance says people can be asked to confirm their birth sex so long as it is 'necessary and proportionate for a service provider, those exercising public functions or an association to know an individual's birth sex to be able to discharge their legal obligations'.
It cautions that any such question 'should be done in a sensitive way which does not cause discrimination or harassment'.
The commission adds that if there is 'genuine concern about the accuracy of the response to a question about birth sex, then a birth certificate could be requested'.
It notes that if a person has a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC), it might be that they have an amended birth certificate in their acquired gender, and that in the 'unlikely event' further enquiries about their biological sex are needed, any 'additional requests should be made in a proportionate way which is discreet and sensitive'.
Elsewhere, the draft code says trans people can be excluded from competitive sport 'when necessary for reasons of safety or fair competition', and gives an example of how some services might be able to adapt to 'offer toilets in individual lockable rooms to be used by both sexes'.
The code states that a service provided only to women and trans women or only to men and trans men 'is not a separate-sex or single-sex service' under the Equality Act and could amount to unlawful sex discrimination against those of the opposite sex who are not allowed to use it.
Commission chairwoman Baroness Kishwer Falkner said there has been an 'obvious' demand since the court's ruling for 'authoritative guidance' for a range of providers from businesses to hospitals to sports clubs.
She said: 'It is important that our code is both an accurate interpretation of the law and clear to those who use it.
'So we want to hear views on the clarity of these updates and urge all interested parties to respond to the consultation over the next six weeks. We will consider every response carefully and amend the draft code where necessary.
'People with protected characteristics should never be discriminated against or harassed when using a service. Where services are provided on a single-sex basis, that needs to be done in a way which is consistent with the law, which protects the rights of all service users and which ensures everyone is treated with respect and dignity.
'It's vital that service providers know what they need to do to comply with the law, and that service users have confidence that every provider is doing so.'
Some trans rights groups have raised concerns about the practical implications of the Supreme Court ruling.
Baroness Falkner acknowledged this is a 'complex area' of law and 'bears on the rights of people with the protected characteristics of sex, sexual orientation and gender reassignment'.
She added: 'We know that there are strongly held views across our society, both about how the law should be interpreted and whether it reflects the right balance between those rights. So, if everybody's rights are to be protected – as the Supreme Court confirmed the law intends – service providers and their legal advisers need help to navigate these challenges.
'The consultation launched today will help ensure our services Code of Practice is a useful and authoritative guide. Please tell us if you think it could be clearer or more helpful.
'That way, whether you're a shop owner or the chair of a local sports club, the manager of a hotel or a hospital, an HR professional or a solicitor, you will have guidance to follow so you can be confident that you're upholding the law.'
The draft code will be presented to women and equalities minister Bridget Phillipson in July (Ben Whitley/PA)
Campaign group the Good Law Project (GLP) last week announced it has taken the first step in a legal challenge against the watchdog, claiming the guidance is 'wrong in law'.
But Maya Forstater, from gender-critical campaign group charity Sex Matters, said the commission's guidance is clear.
She said: 'The draft EHRC guidance reflects the law as clarified by the Supreme Court, so there can be no more excuses for failing to follow it.
'Its clear language and calm, factual tone are a welcome antidote after weeks in which trans lobby groups have sought to present the ruling as complicated and dangerous.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
40 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Trump news at a glance: Day of environmental setbacks across US after judicial and executive decisions
It was a day of environmental setbacks across the US on Friday after the Trump administration moved to keep two Michigan coal plants open and the US supreme court handed a win to fossil fuel firms in an emissions case. Already, the US Department of Energy (DoE) has ordered the JH Campbell coal plant on Lake Michigan to remain open beyond its 31 May closure date, while the administration is expected to prolong the life of the Monroe power plant on Lake Erie, scheduled to begin closing in 2028. The plants emit about 45% of the state's greenhouse gas pollution. Opponents say the order has little support in Michigan, could cost ratepayers hundreds of millions of dollars and is ideologically driven. The state's utilities have said they did not ask for the plants to stay online, and the Trump administration did not communicate with stakeholders before the order, a spokesperson for the Michigan Public Service Commission, which regulates utilities and manages the state's grid, told the Guardian. Here are the key stories at a glance: Fossil fuel companies are able to challenge California's ability to set stricter standards reducing the amount of polluting coming from cars, the US supreme court has ruled in a case that is set to unravel one of the key tools used to curb planet-heating emissions in recent years. The conservative-dominated court voted by seven to two to back a challenge by oil and gas companies, along with 17 Republican-led states, to a waiver that California has received periodically from the federal government since 1967 that allows it to set tougher standards than national rules limiting pollution from cars. Read the full story Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil was released from US immigration detention, where he has been held for more than three months over his activism against Israel's war in Gaza. The release came after an order from a federal judge who said during a hearing on Friday that Khalil was not a flight risk and 'is not a danger to the community, period, full stop'. Read the full story A teenage student and soccer standout was arrested by immigration authorities four days after his high school graduation ceremony in Ohio and deported to Honduras this week, his family has said. Emerson Colindres, 19, had no criminal record and was attending a regularly scheduled appointment with Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Cincinnati when he was detained on 4 June, according to the Cincinnati Enquirer. Read the full story Elizabeth Warren has confronted the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, over reports that the state department is considering redirecting $500m from USAID to the controversial Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, the Israel- and US-backed Gaza food delivery group. Read the full story California's challenge to the Trump administration's military deployment on the streets of Los Angeles returned to a federal courtroom in San Francisco on Friday after an appeals court handed Donald Trump a key procedural win in the case. Read the full story The president failed to mark Juneteenth, commemorating the ending of slavery in the US, until he posted on Thursday night that there are 'too many non-working holidays' in the country. Read the full story Experts fear the US is now in worse shape to respond to a pandemic than before 2020 amid controversial dismissals at health agencies and lacklustre responses to the bird flu and measles outbreaks. The Trump administration has terminated 639 employees at Voice of America and its parent organisation in the latest round of sweeping cuts that have reduced the international broadcasting service to a fraction of its former size. The US supreme court declined to speed up consideration of whether to take up a challenge to Trump's tariffs even before lower courts have ruled in the dispute. Catching up? Here's what happened on 19 June 2025.
Reuters
4 hours ago
- Reuters
US Supreme Court curbs discrimination claims over lost retiree benefits
June 20 (Reuters) - Retirees cannot sue their former employers for disability discrimination after leaving their jobs, the U.S. Supreme Court decided on Friday in a ruling against a disabled former Florida firefighter that could make it harder to bring lawsuits seeking to restore lost retiree benefits. The ruling, opens new tab upheld a lower court's decision to dismiss a lawsuit by Karyn Stanley, who had worked as a firefighter in Sanford, that accused the city of discriminating against her by ending a health insurance subsidy for retirees. Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, who authored the ruling, wrote that only job applicants and current employees are "qualified individuals" covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act, a landmark federal law that prohibits discrimination based on disability. "In other words, the statute protects people, not benefits, from discrimination. And the statute also tells us who those people are: qualified individuals, those who hold or seek a job at the time of the defendant's alleged discrimination," Gorsuch wrote. Gorsuch was joined by the court's five other conservative justices and liberal Justice Elena Kagan. Liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson penned separate dissenting opinions. While Stanley worked for Sanford, located in the suburbs of Orlando, the city changed its policy to limit health insurance coverage for disabled retirees to 24 months after they stopped working. Stanley retired from her job after two decades because her Parkinson's disease had made it impossible for her to work, according to court filings. She sued the city in 2020, claiming it discriminated against workers who retired early because of a disability by giving them a smaller healthcare subsidy than employees who retired after 25 years of service. The city in court filings has said its policy was lawful and necessary to contain costs related to employee benefits. Sanford covers insurance costs for workers who retire after 25 years of service until they turn 65, and had previously done so for employees who retired due to a disability regardless of how long they worked for the city. While Stanley worked for the city, it changed its policy to limit coverage for disabled retirees to 24 months after they stopped working. Stanley was 47 when she retired. Friday's decision will help reduce the legal risks that employers face when they change or terminate retirement benefits, according to Caroline Pieper, a Chicago-based lawyer with the firm Seyfarth Shaw, which represents employers. "While there are certainly other considerations ... this case should give employers more comfort under the ADA when they modify or reduce post-employment offerings," Pieper said, referring to the Americans with Disabilities Act. Friday's ruling affirmed decisions by a judge in Florida and the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which had dismissed Stanley's lawsuit.
The Guardian
7 hours ago
- The Guardian
US supreme court declines to fast-track challenge to Trump tariffs
The US supreme court declined on Friday to speed up its consideration of whether to take up a challenge to Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs even before lower courts have ruled in the dispute. The supreme court denied a request by a family-owned toy company, Learning Resources, that filed the legal challenge against Trump's tariffs to expedite the review of the dispute by the nation's top judicial body. The company, which makes educational toys, won a court ruling on 29 May that Trump cannot unilaterally impose tariffs using the emergency legal authority he had cited for them. That ruling is currently on hold, leaving the tariffs in place for now. Learning Resources asked the supreme court to take the rare step of immediately hearing the case to decide the legality of the tariffs, effectively leapfrogging the US court of appeals for the District of Columbia circuit in Washington, where the case is pending. Two district courts have ruled that Trump's tariffs are not justified under the law he cited for them, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Both of those cases are on appeal. No court has yet backed the sweeping emergency tariff authority Trump has claimed.
