The High Court today confirms that the EHRC's draft code of practice got the law wrong and must be changed.

Women's and men's toilets can be provided on a trans- inclusive basis for customers and service users.

February 13, 2026 - 20:16 UTC

34
7
357
Why is your branding Green?
0
0
4
It's important that you urgently watch this video from Barrister Daniel ShenSmith for an explanation of how you have got this so wrong.
youtu.be/3PPv_lOaKBU
0
0
2
Those of us who have been pointing out for months that this hastily poorly drafted guidance significantly over reaches will be pleased that the government now has to withdraw it and ensure updated guidance.
3
0
54
GLP lost in court, their challenge was dismissed.
0
0
2
Why would the government withdraw guidance that a court has just ruled is lawful??
1
0
3
There is still so much that is unclear and unworkable, forcing trans people to use a third toilet when at work risks outing them, violating their privacy, and is unworkable for many employers.
2
0
60
Im one of your constituents and I want to know why you are lying to me?
0
0
7
Lies.
0
0
6
Question, are you now a Green supporter. I note your leaflet looks like an advert for the Green Party.
0
0
2
The High Court dismissed the challenge on all grounds and ruled that the guidance is lawful.

It’s outrageous that an MP would spread lies like this.
0
0
29
Have you actually read the judgement? The High rejected the GLP’s challenge to the EHRC guidance. Your interpretation of what the High Court said is seriously misleading.

www.google.com/search?q=guardian+high+court+judgement+on+ehrc+guidelines&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-gb&client=safari
0
0
17
Thank you, i hope the members listen to you.
1
0
2
Stop with your disgraceful lies and attacks on women and girls rights . This is nonsense
0
0
5
The High Court today dismissed the claim against the interim (not draft) guidance on all grounds.
Either you've written this without reading the judgment, or you've just completely failed to understand it. Concerning, either way.
0
0
23
Tired of these empty gestures. Leave the party or youre complicit
0
0
4
While it is nice to hear this, it comes alongside new schools guidance which will result in more deaths of trans children, and the explicit transphobia of the front bench. There is no protection for trans people from Labour.
2
0
16
The same as there is no protection for disabled people, Gazans, refugees and other immigrants etc etc etc. When you sit on the Labour benches you enable all that, no matter your personal qualms. It is time to leave Labour.
0
0
4
You should be made to answer for this Orwellian distortion before the House of Commons
Your statement is simply untrue
1
0
16
This isn't true, Kate! Why are you posting this nonsense?
0
0
1
Why are you lying?
0
0
5
A) you’re wrong, the court found the draft COP lawful and dismissed GLP’s case

B) the court already considered all the points you’ve made in this thread

C) the majority of women and girls are still going to need, want, expect some single sex spaces from service providers
2
0
9
D) privacy doesn’t include lying about our sex where its relevant

E) no-one (esp women and girls) should have to continue to suffer because upholding their rights creates difficulties for those who’ve been lying and violating the rights of others for years

E) see

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2lrd0ey074o
1
0
3
1. Not wrong.

2) no they didn’t.

3) the majority of women and girls, including trans women and girls, are still going to need want and expect single sex spaces, but GCs will not allow that.
0
0
0
Thanks for clarifying. You wouldn't know with how the media etc are framing things.
2
0
12
GLP lost, their challenge was dismissed. Kate appears to have misunderstood.
1
0
12
She’s lying GLP lost the case 😂
0
0
5
Great to see a Labour MP voicing these concerns

Please voice them to @bphillipsonmp.bsky.social and your cabinet

Lastly, have you joined the @greenparty.org.uk @zackpolanski.bsky.social ?!
0
0
5
You are not helping us with these stupid lies.
0
0
2
Oh, that's nice of them.
0
0
4
I thought the judgement was that the Claim that the guidance was unlawful was rejected?
1
0
19
it was. There is no charitable explanation for her post such as "perhaps she didn’t know" or "where would you possibly find the judgment?" or "it’s very complicated". It’s stupid, misleading, and disgraces the office of an MP.
0
0
17
Your claim that the judgment "confirms that the EHRC's draft code of practice got the law wrong" is categorically untrue.

The judgment is not even about the code of practice - it's about the interim update. Every single argument made against the interim update was dismissed by the judge.
6
2
74
I rarely post on this site as it is such an echo chamber
of self affirmation
Kate's post is a case in point
2
0
26
You don’t have to be a silly twit for our amusement. I’m sure with some education you could perform at children’s parties under careful supervision
1
0
1
Did you ignore the rest of the judgement? I guess so
0
0
3
OH god, Nadia Whittome is at it now....peddling lies due to "good law project" known for it's trans stance above all other laws and isn't it run by that bloke who clubbed a fox to death in his garden?
0
0
6
Thank the GODS there's a proper legal person to dash cold water on outrageous, woolly and untrue claims. ThankYOU
0
0
4
Liar. Learn to read.
0
0
1
Labour have done nothing about this. This was all Good Law Project, the trans community and our allies. Your party, Kate, this week tried to murder more trans kids with a new Section 28, in addition to the kids your party killed with the puberty blocker ban.
2
0
11
Until someone in Labour does something, ANYTHING, positive for us, Labour is dead to us. That includes you and Nadia. You want our support, then fix it or join an inclusive party. Labour have caused too much harm. Labour Friends of Genocide was bad enough, Labour Friends of Nonces is appalling.
1
0
6
Have you read the judgment? I am not clear in what way your posts accurately reflect the decision, which is problematic given your role as an MP.
0
0
42
Thank you Kate 🙂
0
0
2
Can you ask your friends at the Good Law Project to point to where in the Judgment - setting out their loss against the EHRC - it said "EHRC's draft code of practice got the law wrong"?

Because no one else outside them can see it
0
0
26
This is the opposite of what the judgment says. You either don’t understand the judgment or you are lying because you don’t like the way the law protects women’s rights to privacy, dignity and safety. The judgment is here: www.judiciary.uk/judgments/good-law-project-limited-and-others-v-commission-for-equality-and-human-rights/
0
0
7
I think you shouldn't read anything the GLP says about the cases they're involved in until you've read the actual judgement. This is just embarrassing.
0
0
18
The Judge rejected, in their entirety, the Good Law Projects contentions that the guidance was wrong in law. See in particular paragraphs 75-80 of the judgment. It is deplorable that an MP cannot give an accurate account of a court judgment. You should delete your post above.
3
0
62
Any MP lying about what happened in court today, should be made to explain themselves to their chief whips. They are bringing politics into disrepute.
1
0
36