Thanks for the link, POGS.
The rest of the paragraph is important, too, and shows why she wanted to take the government to court over it.
In fact, much more important. She at least has thought about sovereignty.
" GINA MILLER, BUSINESSWOMAN: No. Whilst I voted 'Remain' and was obviously disappointed in the result: in the days after the result, I kept thinking about this idea of sovereignty that we had won back; and the Prime Minister repeating again and again that they were going to use this ancient secretive Royal prerogative to bypass Parliament.
And the sort of pure nonsense of winning back something and then, you know, throwing it away just did not sit well with my conscience. So I started looking into what this Royal prerogative meant.
And basically, in a nut shell, it would mean that a government - any government - can bypass Parliament. And we go back to 19th century politics, because it would set a precedent that a parliament can take away people's rights.
So this case is much, much wider than Brexit. It obviously has connotations for Brexit, but it is about something much more fundamental. It's about making sure that the process of democracy in the UK is sustained. "