Judges rule Boris Proroguing Parliament is unlawful

Well now this is an interesting turn of events.

The highest civil court in Scotland has ruled that Boris's decision to advise the Queen to suspend parliament was unlawful.

This is just breaking but its a very interesting development.

In a summary of their findings, the Court of Session judges said they were unanimous in their belief that Mr Johnson's decision to suspend was motivated by the "improper purpose of stymying Parliament".

They added: "The Court will accordingly make an Order declaring that the Prime Minister's advice to HM the Queen and the prorogation which followed thereon was unlawful and is thus null and of no effect."

I mean the judge just pulled that the prorogation was unlawful, is null and has no effect. This is pretty huge.

Link

Whats going to be even more interesting is to see how this will play out in the UK Supreme Court next Thursday and if this changes anything in parliament.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Scottish courts do not rule on UK matters. Supreme court will overrule this

originally posted by: Aspie
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Scottish courts do not rule on UK matters. Supreme court will overrule this

They could but its still quite the interesting development nonetheless.

Also would create a bit of a problem, ir the highest court in Scotland comes up against the highest court in of the UK, they seemed pretty unanimous in their decision all be it upon appeal.

Makes it more likely that the Supreme Court will also rule along similar lines, the Scottish courts have said they are not ordering a return to parliament as that is a matter for the Supreme Court.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin
What they going to do? get a time machine? It happened 2 days ago and now all the parties are off on their conferences just the same as every other year.

It's just a bunch of SNP rabble rousers trying to cause trouble because they didn't get all their own way in the referendum.

a reply to: Aspie

Its not SNP "Rabble Rousers" this the highest civil court in Scotland saying this was unlawful, to dismiss it as rabble rousing is being overly dismissive I think.

What would you say if the Supreme Court makes a similar judgement "ohhh its remainers again"

There comes a point where you just have to sit back and admit when something is wrong.

a reply to: Aspie

If the government lose in the Supreme Court they may have to recall Parliament. Interesting times.

originally posted by: RexKramerPRT
a reply to: Aspie

If the government lose in the Supreme Court they may have to recall Parliament. Interesting times.

As if its not crazy enough that one of the people taking the Conservative government to court is the former conservative Prime Minister now it looks likely that the Supreme Court could recall parliament.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin
It is not healthy for the courts to get involved in politics. Presumably the Scottish court was chosen for this exercise because the judges had already indicated their willingness to give the "right" political verdict.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Britain voted to leave - correct

May's gov. performed the worst negotiations in the history of negotiating on purpose because they wanted to remain - correct

Johnson's gov. is forced to use unsightly tactics to suppress the traitorous remainers in parliament - correct

Remainers are playing a very dangerous game supporting their position. Today it is to remain in the EU... ... the next vote which is allowed to be ignored by parliament could be even more important. Freedoms, rights, liberties - once it effects remainers their story will be different.

It's no longer about leave or remain, it's about not ignoring democracy. Give an inch and they will take a mile. If the UK remains in the EU it won't be a victory for remainers. They will have been complicit in setting a precedent which is already creeping across Europe. The precedent of ignoring the people and carrying on regardless.

A very dangerous position to be arguing for.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin
It is not healthy for the courts to get involved in politics. Presumably the Scottish court was choseen for this exercise because the judges had aalready indicated thei willingness to give the "right" political verdict.

I agree that its not healthy for the courts to get involved in politics, but when other avenues are being blocked and it becomes the only choice then they need to step in I guess. So a group of MPs believed that this was unlawful and their only choice then was to take this to the courts really to get a judgement, I personally would have preferred it hadn't come to this.

It seems to be part of a legal approach to blocking no-deal that its being used in conjunction with the action we have seen in Parliament this way. The group trying to block no-deal have brought this to both the Scottish Court of Sessions and the UK Supreme Court and it looks like this case is going to be heard in the Supreme Court next week. Given that the highest Scottish court has said its unlawful in some pretty strong terms it seems reasonable to expect that the UK Supreme Court are now more likely to make the same decision.

Time will tell I guess.

Still a interesting development I think.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

A former conservative Prime Minister who actually prorogued parliament himself to stop the cash for questions debate

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin
Not the court. I mean the people who brought it to court are just SNP rabble rousers

a reply to: and14263

Britain voted to leave - correct

Correct but here is my issue with this argument.

The vote was to leave the EU, thats all that means, that the UK will leave the European Union. Now between that and the hard no-deal that the current government are calling for there is are a plethora of options, we could remain with in the single market for example. I personally believe that would have been the best compromise, but there are other options could we not have agreed a Canada type deal, or a "Norway Plus" deal the list goes on.

You see there seems to be this myth developing that its only through a no-deal that the will of the people can be respected but this is utter rubbish. The truth is that what Brexit means is much more complex, there are lots of options between remaining in the EU and a hard no-deal.

Whats been currently happening in parliament is not about blocking Brexit, its about blocking no-deal. The problem seems to be as I see is that some of the harder Brexit supporters are trying to paint blocking no-deal as blocking Brexit.

originally posted by: Aspie
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin
Not the court. I mean the people who brought it to court are just SNP rabble rousers

Sorry but no, just no, John Major is one of the lead guys on the London case, are you trying to claim he is a SNP Rabble Rouser.

This current claim against the government came form a mix of 75 MPs, am sure some of them are probably SNP but to say its "Just SNP Rabble Rousers" is incorrect.

Regardless though of who brought the claim to the courts, the courts have ruled in favour of the group of cross-party MPs that the advice to prorogue was unlawful.

Reaction to this is still breaking but there are now calls for Boris to recall parliament to allow debate on this issue.

I don't think he is going to do that but it does give us some idea of the gravity of this judgement.

It is possible that given how strongly worded the judgement is that Boris might want to bring parliament back to stop the embarrassment of having the High Court rule against him and force his hand.

If found the phrase "stymiing parliment" to be ironic.. They have stymied themselves for thred years due to their own ineptness. If Boris thought parliment would pass ANYTHING he wouldnt have booted them.

What exactly is parliment going to do in 6 weeks?????? Same as the previous 3 years...nuttin.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin
I am getting impressed by the way this whole campaign is slavishly imitating the American anti-Trump campaigning.
Not just the general style of reliance upon the mighty power of Twitter and hysterical over-reactions, but in detais;

A few weeks back, Polly Toynbee called the Brexiteers "deplorables", without any sense of irony.
The suggestion seen on Twitter that Boris is overturning democracy "with the help of the Russian military".
Calls for Boris to be impeached (do they realise how many years it took to get through the impeachment of Warren Hastings?)
Now the imitation of the "let's use the Democrat judges" strategy, and the general idea of trying to frustrate the executive by inventive procedural tricks, similar to the "electoral college" business of 2017.
I'm expecting Boris to be accused soon of suppressing people's First Amendment rights, or being too friendly with the gun lobby.

a reply to: lakenheath24

What exactly is parliment going to do in 6 weeks?????? Same as the previous 3 years...nuttin.

I don't think the issue is so much that something drastic could be changed within the few weeks that parliament is shut down.

During this time, government is not scrutinised, select committees don't sit and all bills making their way through are scrapped. Its been described by the courts, the speaker, the majority of our sovereign parliament as well as the devolved governments as being undemocratic. It also seems like Boris has mislead parliament which is a pretty big no-no in the UK parliament.

So this isn't so much about Brexit its about much more than that, its about the government acting unlawfully.

I get that you might look at this and think its not going to change anything with Brexit but we need to be clear that this isn't so much about trying to change anything about Brexit, this is about right and wrong, lawful and unlawful.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin
The term 'no deal' is complete propaganda.

We would exit on 'WTO Terms' and will be free to form new agreements. It will not be an easy ride, but eventually we will form new agreements.

Interestingly, it is only remainers who have a problem with the meaning of what was on the ballot paper.

Now, let me say this very obvious point: Johnson is claiming to be open to a 'no deal' (ahem) because this is SIMPLE negotiation strategy. Very simple negotiating strategy that should have got us a very good agreement but those fighting against him, who clearly have no idea about negotiating, have come close to ruining this VERY SIMPLE strategy.

He does not want to exit on WTO terms but the EU have to be made to believe we will in order for them to move. The ridiculous parliamentary remainers have gone all out selfish and stupid on this one - making it CLEAR they do not want to leave and will do all they can to remain. It's pathetic.

A 'deal' would be brilliant, but not a fake deal like the one May 'negotiated'.

a reply to: and14263

Dude I don't what to tell you.

A government minister resigned the other day saying that the government was doing nothing to negotiate a deal and was basically happy with no deal.

Regardless this thread isn't so much about that but about the ruling of the courts.