New bathroom guidance for trans people ‘the kind of policy you’d see in Trump’s America’, campaigners say

The government has been accused of imitating Donald Trump’s America after newly published guidance confirmed single-sex services must be based on biological sex, raising concerns that transgender people will be pushed out of public life.

The Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has published its updated code of practice in April 2025, more than a year after the Supreme Court ruled that the words “woman” and “gender” in the Equality Act 2010 referred to a biological woman and biological sex.

But charities and campaign groups have hit out at the guidance, saying it is “worryingly similar to the US toilet ban condemned by the UK foreign office in 2016”, with the Trans+ Solidarity Alliance (TSA) warning it would be a “Section 28 moment for the Labor government that defines its legacy on LGBTQ+ rights”.

Section 28 was a controversial law introduced by Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative government in 1988; It prohibited local authority services, including schools, from “deliberately promoting homosexuality” or teaching the acceptability of same-sex relationships as “so-called family relationships”.

Meanwhile, in 2016, there was a wave of state and federal laws in the United States restricting transgender people from using public restrooms consistent with their gender identity. But EHRC chief executive Mary-Ann Stephenson rejected any idea of ​​inspections of toilets in the UK, arguing instead that “common sense” should be used.

The new EHRC law covers a range of scenarios, from sports, which states that transgender people must compete alongside others whose birth gender is their gender, rather than their gender identity, to hospital wards, where it says transgender patients can be legally excluded if they are single-gender.

The guidance, published on Thursday evening, the last day before parliament goes into recess, states: “In separate or single-sex services, a trans man will be excluded from a men-only service because his gender is female, and a trans woman will be excluded from a women’s-only service because his gender is male.”

The guidance, compiled by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), also suggests that, in limited circumstances, it may be considered legitimate to ask someone to confirm what their gender is, but that this should be done “as sensitively as possible and with respect for the person’s privacy”.

Regarding bathrooms, which the commission said were “essential for everyone”, the law states that it would be “very unlikely that it would be proportionate to put a transgender person in a position where there are no services they are allowed to use”.

The report states that “approaching any person to inquire about their gender in relation to facilities such as toilets, which are a secondary service to the essential service, is neither practical nor appropriate.”

Responding to the directive, TSA director Alexandra Parmar-Yee warned: “The law here is a complete mess and clearly many businesses will go gender neutral to avoid headaches, but the government risks pushing trans people even further out of public life.

“This guidance will be a Section 28 moment for the Labor government, defining its legacy on LGBTQ+ rights. It’s the kind of trans rights policy we’d expect from Trump’s America, and is worryingly similar to the US toilet ban condemned by the UK foreign office in 2016.”

He added: “While some of the language has been softened, the same exclusionary core remains. Treating transgender people in this way puts the UK outside the international human rights norm, and the right thing for Labor to do here would be to urgently legislate to clarify Parliament’s original intent for trans equality.”

Jess O’Thomson, trans leader at the Good Law Project, says the guidance has seen “major changes since the previous transphobic draft” after an earlier draft law was given to ministers by the EHRC last September, but warns it is still “not good enough”.

They said: “It’s good to see clear guidance that associations can be for more than one protected characteristic – so you can have an organization for both cis and trans women. “And the suggestion that people check their birth certificates before using the toilet has also been dropped.

“But it still treats trans people as the third gender, suggests they should use separate spaces, and completely ignores the harm this causes and human rights law. We will continue to fight this discriminatory approach.”

EHRC chief executive Mary-Ann Stephenson rejected any idea of ​​inspections of toilets and called for common sense to be used.

“I think we need to have a common-sense approach to this,” he said. “We’ve had separate toilet services for men and women for decades, and we don’t have people at the door checking who comes in.”

He said unisex services, such as self-contained lockable cabins, could be provided for transgender people “who are unable or unwilling to use services for their biological sex.”

Ms Stephenson added: “The law makes it very clear that going into toilets at a train station or shopping center and asking people their gender will generally not be proportionate.”

Meanwhile, Scotland for Women, which was behind the Supreme Court’s decision last year, praised the publication of the long-awaited guidance as “an important milestone in ensuring the promotion and protection of women’s rights”.

Women and Equalities Minister Bridget Phillipson also said the Supreme Court decision “makes clear that sex means biological sex” under the Equality Act and that “transgender people are still protected by the Act”.

The government insisted the new rules “provide clear and actionable guidance for organizations to take a pragmatic approach to protecting and serving the needs of our community” and support service providers such as hospitals, cafes and leisure centers “to ensure they can make practical and ultimately sensible decisions for everyday scenarios such as toilet provision”.

The codes of practice, which will apply across England, Scotland and Wales, have been laid before Parliament for consideration by both MPs in the House of Commons and their colleagues in the House of Lords. It will not become law for 40 days.

Although there is no need for a vote for the bill to become law and become law, both Houses can make a motion to reject the law during this period.

Ms Stephenson said she hoped the guidance would be clear enough to “help reduce the risk of litigation”, but Sarah Owen, chair of the women and equalities committee, suggested there would be “expected legal challenges” and “this hell of uncertainty will continue” for trans people.

He added that the committee would call Ms Stephenson and Ms Phillipson to answer questions about the matter “as soon as possible”.

Responding to the guidance, Andy Burnham urged Britain to have a “live and let live” approach to life when asked about the newly published guidance on single-sex spaces.

The mayor of Greater Manchester, seen as Sir Keir’s main rival for the Labor leadership if he wins next month’s by-election, said people needed to “stop arguing”, find common ground and “start coming together”.

He said it was “time” to implement guidance based on the Supreme Court’s landmark decision on biological sex last year, but that it needed to be done in the “fairest and most compassionate way possible”.

The Cabinet Office has been contacted for comment.