Wow, wasn't expecting this - apparently it'll go to the UK Supreme Court.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
BREXIT |OT2.0| A parade of endless victories for Boris Johnson
- Thread starter Uzzy
- Start date
- Status
Wow, wasn't expecting this - apparently it'll go to the UK Supreme Court.
It's as sensible as it's going to get. At least if the electorate vote again to Leave, now knowing what Leave means and looks like, it would be a somewhat informed decision and a far more legitimate expression of democracy. Also, if the second referendum where to be binding unlike the first, the electoral commission will actually have some teeth to ensure people play within the rules.
A second leave vote would be a stupid and disastrous choice, but far preferable to the nonsense of the first referendum where Leave could mean whatever you wanted it to mean (SM, CU, independence, Norway, no immigration, sovereignty, sunny uplands, etc etc).
IIRC it's still Scottish (legal system) judges that preside over these cases of they get to the UKSC.
Ruled unlawful the day after it happens.
We truly are living in the peak banterverse and I hate it.
Wonder if Johnson & Co. give a single flying fuck about what a Scottish court has to say.
Its going to the Supreme Court of the UK, so they definitely will have to listen.
Really? I know next to nothing about the supreme court but guessed in cases like this they would make a ruling when English and Scots law conflict. Thought it was always the same judges too for some reason.
I'd imagine the executive is still bound by Scots law as much as English law on constitutional matters - in times like this I wish I still knew law students
Well fuck looks like I'm looking up a Supreme Court stream next week
(I know they probably won't have one though)
(I know they probably won't have one though)
Those bastard Scots. Should have never let them in the Union, eh?
Ooft, that's a sare yin for Boris there.
Ooft, that's a sare yin for Boris there.
It's like a rerun of the civil war, with the Scots intervening to save Parliament from an overreaching executive.
(Minus the actual violence and religious element, hopefully)
Good point, the anti Scottish shite worked a treat for Cameron.
It's laughable that we all know WHY it's happening, but that legally, they can say about a new Queen's Speech and blah-di-blah and they will probably satisfy the Supreme Court.
Did the English court decision come from evidence produced by the government? That's what the Scottish case pushed heavily and its clear that it was done to stop parliament scrutinising government behaviour.
Feels like this is great material for Sturgeon too. Either Scottish judges help defend British democracy, or the 'UK' Supreme Court denies Scotland a voice in Parliament (alongside everyone else, but still).
So is Parliament unprorogued (lol)
I wonder if Liz even gives a fuck
Whatever the outcome at the SC, this is fucked up either way
Edit: The Scottish court will issue an order but it hasn't yet
I wonder if Liz even gives a fuck
Whatever the outcome at the SC, this is fucked up either way
Edit: The Scottish court will issue an order but it hasn't yet
Last edited:
It's not about being bound to Scottish law, because ultimately the case is going to the UKSC.
What I'm interested in is whether the UKSC, will keep a narrow focus on the judgment, (prorogation stymies Parliament), or whether they'll generally focus on prorogation overall.
Scotland ain't worth shit and we're a country comprising of nothing but those blasted remoaners, after all.
My assumption is they'd have to consider it on the basis of Scots Law, though? I'm keen to read more on the implications on this from lawyer-y types.
Right, bonus points: Questioning the legitimacy of the Scottish legal system
Had the pleasure of reading both The Sun and the Daily Mail's take on Bercow/the closure of Parliament yesterday evening.
Good lord - both were foaming at the mouth.
As for the Littlejohn piece about it and the law forcing Boris to seek an extension (which he framed as preventing Brexit...)....bloke seems to think that a party leadership campaign pledge is more valid than a law passed by elected representatives of the people.
Good lord - both were foaming at the mouth.
As for the Littlejohn piece about it and the law forcing Boris to seek an extension (which he framed as preventing Brexit...)....bloke seems to think that a party leadership campaign pledge is more valid than a law passed by elected representatives of the people.
Shit, looks like I was misreading: the matter being referred to the UKSC, is a final decision on interdiction (prohibiting prorogation). But as part of that, UKSC will look at the judgment handed, and therefore whether it agrees.
The first two paragraphs are the reasons for the decision.
Last edited:
In the government response to the anti-prorogation petition they said:
"Prorogation is a prerogative Act of the Crown, exercised on the advice of Ministers. We must respect the referendum result and the UK will be leaving the EU on 31 October whatever the circumstances.
The UK will be leaving the EU on 31 October whatever the circumstances. We must respect the referendum result."
Whatever pretense they try to give it, they've basically admitted that it was to force through Brexit.
- Status