I'm following #legaltwitter discussion on whether police have overstepped the mark of civil liberty viz ppl walking in national parks in this extraordinary time ... I'm struck by lack of similar discussion over past few years on "Stonewall Law" vs what the GRA & EqA really say
GRA S 22 says you must not disclose information about the sex of a GRC-holder, if you have received it in official capacity (apart from in specific circumstances eg preventing crime) 
This does not apply to info about the sex of someone "without* a GRC, nor information obtained outside of these official capacity channels (including by the ordinary means of 👀 and memory).
This is what Lady Hale said in a SC judgment in 2017
This is what Lady Hale said in a SC judgment in 2017
And yet the apparatus of state & regulation: police, @EHRC , judiciary, CPS, @IpsoNews , @acasorguk, NHS, ONS, local govt etc.. all impose draconian restrictions on themselves and others on talking about and accurately recording information on sex.
None of this is required by law.
And all of this has been remarkably uninteresting to human rights commentators & orgs.
GRA reform has been kicked into the long grass, but Stonewall Law remains to be unpicked.
Civil liberty doesn't stop mattering because of this crisis.
And all of this has been remarkably uninteresting to human rights commentators & orgs.
GRA reform has been kicked into the long grass, but Stonewall Law remains to be unpicked.
Civil liberty doesn't stop mattering because of this crisis.
