Not suggesting they aren’t up to no good, but a journalist speaking in court in support of a media app happens often - your thread gave off impression this was some unprecedented thing by focussing on the address rather than substance of the app or the fact it sounds like they used it to grandstand

Sadly yeah we probably won’t know the detail, but I am always just frustrated when suggestions of conspiracy or misconduct are introduced in places where the idea is easily discredited vs ample areas where weird transphobic shit does actually go down amid the processes of the state

It does instinctively seem odd, would need to see a transcript, parsing the thread it sounds like they made a request for something to be disclosed and so I assume they were fishing and the judge asked them to explain why they think it needs to be disclosed and they went on a rant? Guessing tho

Strange he hasn’t said anything online but he was speaking at a vigil

I may be wrong! But I think while we have a long way to go, this is equally far away from the govt’s initial position. Every chip is a win atm

Then we have a fight on our hands but it would be a huge win if it said ‘you can operate on a trans exclusionary basis where this is a proportionate means to a legitimate aim, but you don’t have to’ vs current position of ‘you must’

I think they mean case by case based on the nature of the service reading the submissions, which tbf was pretty much the status quo under the EA even if exemptions rarely used. Her written argument suggests a proportionality test, and if the judge agrees it’s not blanket - draft code is probs dead

As a trans person I couldn’t be more relieved that Bridget lost, I appreciate why you supported her but I don’t think any of us believe she is inclined to protect us. Hopefully Lucy will be listened to by the government on this among other things 🤞

Imagine this will go down like a bucket of cold sick, especially coming on the same day they’ve been forced to withdraw their ‘interim update’ based on the same legal position they want the govt to rubber stamp www.scenemag.co.uk/good-law-pro...

As otherwise we will only be opposing it once it’s almost certainly too late

Sadly with the process as it stands, we won’t see it until after it’s been laid post ministerial approval and set to take effect automatically under negative SI process. Really there should be transparency prior to the decision I agree, but we have to assume it’s as bad as they keep saying it’ll be

Govt have total control over what happens next. They can require the EHRC produce a code that is compliant with the Human Rights Act and the public sector equality duty. They also have a range of legislative options open. If they choose not to act, they are responsible for every bit of harm.

The Supreme Court judgement says 'trans people's rights should not be affected'. The Government will *try to say 'responsibility for codes of practice lies with the EHRC'. In the meantime, the draft code continues to mandate an unprecedented regime of trans+ exclusion and segregation.

Amazing work! 💕