Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
Genuine question from me. 13:36 - Sep 24 with 753 viewshomer_123

So, today the Court decided, unanimously, that the proroguing of Parliament was within the purview of the Courts(regardless of the subsequent ruling it being illegal).

It sets a very clear precedent. That Courts can intervene where, before, they could not.

Is there a dark/ flip side to this? Parliament and Governments have a degree of freedom that others do not, for various (sometimes good) reasons. Whilst I welcome the outcome today - in the long term is there any reason why this would not be a good situation (in that Courts can now be involved in this going forward)?

I'm not talking about the legality of Johnson's proroguing but the fact it's now within the purview of the Courts.
[Post edited 24 Sep 13:42]

Ade Akinbiyi couldn't hit a cows arse with a banjo...
Poll: Who won't play many games this season?

0

Genuine question from me. on 13:39 - Sep 24 with 720 viewsBluefish

I see it that it only becomes active because he is trying to use an old law or an incorrect law to bypass the process. If process is followed there is no place for the court

Top 3 fanboys J2, Dolly, MattinLondon. They wished for this and got their way. Every village has an idiot and Suffolk has a lot of villages, Never been wrong, Odious smug little chap
Poll: How would you vote now in a general election?
Blog: [Blog] Long Live King George

1

Genuine question from me. on 13:45 - Sep 24 with 675 viewsSteve_M

I think the key here is that, in the judgement of the court, the proroguing was done in order to prevent Parliamentary scrutiny. I don't think this necessarily sets a precedent for a decision made with Parliamentary support.

Poll: When are the squad numbers out?
Blog: Some Mid-Season Thoughts

1

Genuine question from me. on 13:46 - Sep 24 with 670 viewsMookamoo

I think the ruling was made with the full understanding of the political context - they've basically called Johnson out for not allowing accountability. You would hope there is a specific set of circumstances that have allowed them to make the ruling which hopefully shouldn't happen again for some time.

There is the danger our Supreme Court could go the same way as the US in that the governing body try to pack it with extreme versions of their own supporters whenever possible.
1

Genuine question from me. on 13:50 - Sep 24 with 650 viewssparks

Parliament could pass a law excluding specific acts from court oversight in principle.

Not convinced the court has extended its remit her in any event. Just new facts to apply existing principles to.

The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it. (Sir Terry Pratchett)
Poll: Is Fred drunk this morning?

2

Genuine question from me. on 14:01 - Sep 24 with 619 viewsGuthrum

No. The courts can only intervene if there is a legal challenge to a future prorogation. This will be an extremely rare event, as most are not any way contentious and there are good reasons for them to happen. It would only be a problem if the reasons were not lawful ones.

Effectively, they always did have the right to pass judgement, it's just never arisen in recent centuries.

Good Lord! Whatever is it?
Poll: McCarthy: A More Nuanced Poll
Blog: [Blog] For Those Panicking About the Lack of Transfer Activity

2
Genuine question from me. on 15:58 - Sep 24 with 522 viewsPinewoodblue

Genuine question from me. on 14:01 - Sep 24 by Guthrum

No. The courts can only intervene if there is a legal challenge to a future prorogation. This will be an extremely rare event, as most are not any way contentious and there are good reasons for them to happen. It would only be a problem if the reasons were not lawful ones.

Effectively, they always did have the right to pass judgement, it's just never arisen in recent centuries.


The supreme court has ruled it was unlawful to prorouge parliament until 14 th October. Had it been for a shorter period they may not have deemed it unlawful.

Poll: How many changes to starting eleven for game against Millwall?

0

Genuine question from me. on 16:09 - Sep 24 with 512 viewsitfcjoe

Surely it does the opposite - it stops parliament being shut without a good and fair reason?

That is all they've done

Poll: Club vs country? What would you choose
Blog: What is Going on With the Academy at Ipswich Town?

0
Genuine question from me. on 16:25 - Sep 24 with 469 viewshomer_123

Genuine question from me. on 16:09 - Sep 24 by itfcjoe

Surely it does the opposite - it stops parliament being shut without a good and fair reason?

That is all they've done


Huh?

Ade Akinbiyi couldn't hit a cows arse with a banjo...
Poll: Who won't play many games this season?

0
Login to get fewer ads


Genuine question from me. on 18:36 - Sep 24 with 403 viewsfactual_blue

'To every subject of this land, however powerful, I would use Thomas Fuller's words over three hundred years ago, ‘Be ye never so high, the law is above you.’'

Lord Denning 1977, quoted by michael gove on his installation as Lord Chancellor.

Ta neige, Acadie, fait des larmes au soleil
Poll: What will The Announcement be about
Blog: [Blog] The Shape We're In

1
Genuine question from me. on 18:38 - Sep 24 with 392 viewsSpruceMoose

Genuine question from me. on 18:36 - Sep 24 by factual_blue

'To every subject of this land, however powerful, I would use Thomas Fuller's words over three hundred years ago, ‘Be ye never so high, the law is above you.’'

Lord Denning 1977, quoted by michael gove on his installation as Lord Chancellor.


I think you meant Michael Bolton.

Poll: Selectamod

0
Genuine question from me. on 18:44 - Sep 24 with 366 viewsitfcjoe

Genuine question from me. on 16:25 - Sep 24 by homer_123

Huh?


All the courts have done is stopped Govt unlawfully shutting down parliament, they haven’t interfered in the way you suggest - they have allowed parliament to carry on doing their jobs.

The dark side would be had they failed to do so that any PM could shut down parliament - they’ve allowed it to retain their voice

Poll: Club vs country? What would you choose
Blog: What is Going on With the Academy at Ipswich Town?

0
Genuine question from me. on 18:47 - Sep 24 with 362 viewsfactual_blue

Genuine question from me. on 18:38 - Sep 24 by SpruceMoose

I think you meant Michael Bolton.


Bolton is a palindrome of Ipswich.

Ta neige, Acadie, fait des larmes au soleil
Poll: What will The Announcement be about
Blog: [Blog] The Shape We're In

0

Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© TWTD 1995-2019