Supreme court appeal today over proroguing of Parliament

Not sure if I would have put it that way Fennel. The lawyers are nicely careful about their wording. The courts job is to decide if the proroguing of parliament was lawful. The first step in this is to decide if this is a matter of law - on which they can pronounce, or a matter of politics on which they can't.

It is not, as you put it, whether it is "an exception from the principle that law courts can't get involved in political matters?"

Putting it like that makes it sound as if the are partial in a particular way. They are concerned with the law.

If it is justiciable then they need to decided on the finding of the Scottish case and the English case.

I would suggest anyone who believes our judiciary is becoming politicised should watch some of the case.

Andrew Adonis
@Andrew_Adonis

John Major gives evidence today to the Supreme Court

Johnson, who caused the suspension of Parliament, won’t even provide a witness statement, let alone appear

Andrew Adonis

John Major deserves great credit for calling out Johnson’s lies & dangerously unconstitutional action

Think about it: an ex Tory prime minister appearing in the Supreme Court to condemn his successor for lying and abusing the constitution!

Whether or not this challenge is upheld it is fascinating to watch the Supreme Court in action.

Isn't it just, Anja. Oh that our journalists had legal training. I can read a "story" in a book when I want to. I really don't need the mash up between relevant fact, irrelevant fact and fiction that our press pours out. It's no wonder more and more politicians are refusing their interviews.

Watching the grownups at work!

But isn’t the prorogation of Parliament only for a few days? A recess of 3 weeks would happen for the party conference season.

Yes, a tactic by Boris and the Remainers are howling. But the Leavers are delighted. We want to get on with Brexit not keep having the HoC throw spanner’s in the works.

Remainers have had over 3 years to discuss and disagree with the government. Now they are furious that at the sharp end (which was always going to arrive) they have been out manoeuvred.

A whole load of deadlines are beginning to converge.

A lot is going on in the background. I do honestly believe Boris will get a deal.

spanners -

Predictive text!

ug no one is buying that argument.

We know that MPs were giving active consideration as to whether recess was sensible given the crises we are in.

So recess was very likely not to have taken place as Johnson knows, which is why he went for prorogue

Quite - a recess is not essential, there are far more important things at stake at the moment; your post was disingenuous, ug

Sir John Major’s submission to the Supreme Court published.

If High Court upheld: “the consequence would be that there is nothing in law to prevent a Prime Minister from proroguing Parliament in any circumstances or for any reason.”

Does anybody know for a fact, or are we in unknown territory here?

If Boris doesn't ask for an extension and we leave the EU without a deal on 31st October he will, presumably, have broken the law. Now he may or may not be in trouble, but does that mean that we don't leave the EU without a deal because it was an unlawful procedure?

Sorry, about the above post. I meant to start a new topic with the heading 'What would happen if Boris ignored the law' but it all went wrong.

It's a good question, AllThe Ls.

There is currently a case going through the Scottish courts asking, if Johnson won't ask for an extension, that another responsible person is required to do it.

Interesting to know how the EU would react if the Scottish case falls (which it is highly likely to) and Johnson crashes us out by ignoring the law.

Sir John Major's submission here:

www.supremecourt.uk/docs/written-case-for-sir-john-major.pdf

Listening to Lord Wolfe, and his excellent submission, I’m not sure how the Supreme Court cannot agree.

Ug why can’t you understand the difference between a recess and proroguing? I’m truly baffled

Ug's just parrotting Brexit Central, or whatever Brexity source she gets her soundbites from.

The sources know that most Leavers aren't terribly interested in facts or parliamentary democracy.

AllTheLs I posed just that question myself on another thread yesterday! Maybe it does need it's own thread? Not sure if anyone knows, tbh.

If this is lost it will because the submissions from Scotland and Ireland in particular have not maintained a strictly unbiased submissions because they have strayed into the political field.

Not good

Smacked botties!!

alltheLs

Unchartered territory - god knows

For Scotland please read Cherry and MPs. I didn’t mean the Scottish government.

Lord Fordham for Welsh government, gets it.

Much better

I'd point out that Lavery of NI was pulled up 3 times for doing just that Ww2 but I don't recall that O'Neill was. Admittedly I may simply have missed it!

mcem I think after O’Neill’s submission and his historical reverie, which certainly bordered on straying into the political, together with the Irish submission this morning is making the Lords uncomfortable.

Lady Hale, pulled O’Neill up yesterday and the Lord who will always vote with the government also moaned.

Then today a lot of them indicated how uncomfortable they were with the Irish submission..

But just watch the Welsh submission, that is what they want.