European Union

Now that Viktor Orbán voted out of office in Hungry the European Union courts have ruled that;

The new EHRC code isn’t just about trans people’s access to toilets - it’s about protecting other vital single-sex spaces

The Guardian

Susanna Rustin

Mon 1 Jun 2026

Thirteen months after the UK supreme court delivered its landmark ruling that sex in the Equality Act refers to biological sex, and 10 days after an updated draft “code of practice” from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) was laid before parliament, the UK is once again rowing about single-sex spaces, and particularly toilets. Once again, the purpose and value of those spaces for women are at risk of being eclipsed by complaints from people who would prefer that they didn’t exist in a way that complies with the current law. The code confirms that there is no legal way to open a single-sex service to people of the other sex, even if they are trans. Organisations are told to address the likely disadvantage to trans people by offering alternative, mixed-sex facilities. Associations (membership organisations with rules) can be trans-inclusive if they want, as long as they do not claim to be single-sex. Bridget Phillipson, the women and equalities minister, said that avoiding any new “burden on business” was one of the reasons why the revised guidance has taken more than a year to arrive.

[...]

Trans people also suffer from high rates of domestic abuse and need access to services. There are justified concerns about inadequate funding. But mixed-sex support groups already exist, and a trend towards gender-neutral commissioning has been noted. The vast majority of public spaces and activities are already mixed-sex – which is why the Equality Act refers to single-sex ones as “exceptions”. What is not OK is the removal of this option on grounds that it is bigoted to seek a female-only space; or the claim that a service is single-sex when it is not.

The ILGA Europe writes that;

Landmark CJEU ruling demands Member States to ensure legal gender recognition to guarantee freedom of movement

Today’s judgment by the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) says all member states must provide for legal gender recognition procedures allowing their citizens who have exercised their right to move and reside freely in another member state to obtain identity documents matching their lived gender.

Today, the CJEU delivered its ruling in the case C-43/24 Shipova, marking a historic step forward for trans people’s rights across the EU.

The Court stated that under EU law provisions on freedom of movement and fundamental right to private and family life, member states have an obligation to legally recognise the lived gender of their nationals who have exercised their right to move and reside in another member state in their civil status registers; i.e. they must have a functioning process for legal gender recognition (“LGR”) in place. This is because, as the Court confirmed, identity documents and passports are key for EU nationals to enjoy freedom of movement, so in order to avoid “considerable inconveniences” in particular during identity checks or cross-border travel or in professional settings. Therefore, member states must provide identity documents and civil registry entries matching the person’s lived gender. The Court also recalled that tolerating discrimination against trans persons breaches their dignity and freedom. It also decided that national courts are not bound by supreme court’s decisions that run contrary to today’s judgment and EU law.

[...]

Why this matters 

This judgment goes beyond one individual case and applies across the EU. Currently, there are three EU member States, Hungary, Bulgaria and Slovakia, that through laws, judgments and constitutional amendments, have made any access to LGR impossible. Without such recognition, basic rights, from crossing borders and accessing healthcare to applying for a job or enrolling at university, become daily struggles.

The CJEU now, for the first time, clearly states that having access to LGR is a prerequisite to enjoying fundamental rights within the EU and that EU member states have an obligation to ensure access to LGR for nationals who exercised their freedom of movement and reside abroad. The judgement confirms that the absence of any possibility to obtain LGR in a member state is incompatible with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the Treaties provisions.

No way will the Supreme Court, they're too far to the right for them to rule like this! The Courthouse News Service said,

Pieter Cannoot, professor of law and diversity and legal scholar at Ghent University, said the judgment strengthens a growing line of EU case law limiting national restrictions on the recognition of LGBTQ identities. The court, he said, has “taken an important step towards recognizing a right to legal gender recognition in the EU,” linking the issue not only to free movement but also to fundamental rights such as privacy and nondiscrimination.

Other scholars see the decision as part of a broader shift in EU constitutional law. Uladzislau Belavusau, senior researcher in European law at the University of Amsterdam and the T.M.C. Asser Institute, said the ruling reflects a broader shift in EU law, where the accuracy of identity documents is increasingly tied to the practical exercise of EU citizenship. In his view, the judgment shows the court moving toward what he calls the rise of “sexual citizenship” in the union, where recognition of gender identity becomes part of how free movement rights function in practice.

This is not sitting well some of the countries in the EU, ZENIT reports that;

This clashes with conservative laws in countries like Bulgaria, where the Supreme Court rejected a registry change to uphold public interest and social values. Critically, the CJEU asserts EU law’s supremacy over national constitutional interpretations, even in core areas like civil law and personal identity. This overreach exemplifies Brussels’ agenda to centralize power, overriding elected parliaments and traditional cultural norms. The decision raises profound questions about EU primacy’s limits in sensitive matters, potentially compelling recognition of transgender identities that undermine societal foundations rooted in natural law. As Europe faces demographic and moral declines, this judicial activism threatens to impose progressive ideologies that erode national heritage and the sanctity of human dignity from conception onward.

It is kind of like the divide between the southern and the northern over trans rights!