The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.UK court: Boris Johnson's suspension of Parliament unlawful
By JILL LAWLESS LONDON©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.
59 Comments
Login to comment
Chip Star
Those activist Scottish judges are trying to take down a duly chosen prime minister. The Scottish are notorious Deep Staters.
Yubaru
Trying to circumvent the law to push through his own agenda! I wonder if he is going to blast the judges on twitter now?
Daniel Naumoff
Yadda yadda laws are there to protect the establishment...
...but another madman (or rather a man-child, madman is too big for his likes) got slapped with it, as well as world-wide proven to be a nuisance and unfair player. That's a yellow card. Hopefully he does not go as far to receive a red one, as many others might suffer in the process.
Alfie Noakes
Look, there are Scottish judges and there are "Scottish judges". These people are clearly "Scottish judges".
Chip Star
And the "Scottish judges" clearly can't do their jobs without bias.
Thsnks for joining in the early morning comedy, Alfie!
CrazyJoe
So the way I see it, Johnson really helped create this entire Brexit mess with his giant Brexit bus and pushing it down the throats of the Brits with false info and propaganda. Then he wants to be Prime Minister on the premise that he and he alone can fix this Brexit nightmare that he created. Reminds me of someone.... hmmmm? who could it be?
umbrella
Scottish judges said it was unlawful but last week English judges said it wasn't unlawful. Which verdict is correct? The English one I would presume but I am confused here. Anyway next Tuesday the Surpreme court of the UK will hand down its verdict.
JJ Jetplane
Looks like another prime minister downed by Brexit. Maybe the next one will do a little better.
Alfie Noakes
Well, if you don't laugh you'd cry!
Particularly as Lying Johnson's "advisor" Dominic Cummings is a Social Darwinist with very strange and disturbing eugenicist views which he aired on his blog:
*"However, the spread of knowledge and education is itself a danger and cannot eliminate gaps in wealth and power created partly by unequally distributed heritable characteristics."*
https://skwawkbox.org/2019/09/01/number-10-refuses-to-engage-with-questions-about-cummings-chillingly-eugenicist-comments/
Even Trump would never go that far. No wonder the British far-right Tory/UKIP/British National Party ethno-fascists support Johnson.
https://beastrabban.wordpress.com/2019/09/04/dominic-cummings-social-darwinist-views/
Ah_so
Bungling Boris Botches Brexit.
(wish I could be tabloid headline writer).
No Business
So? It's a Scottish judge. Stay strong, Boris. Get to Europe pronto and start telling countries to veto any further extension to Brexit.
umbrella
Any lawyers here? English judges say his actions were legal, Scottish judges say it was illegal. People will want to believe whichever verdict suits their political stance of course. Will be interesting to see what the Supreme Court come up with next week.
SuperLib
Seems that would deserve a comment from Johnson.
Serrano
Isn't it unlawful for the government to refuse to carry out the will of the people as expressed in referendums?
Simon Foston
SerranoToday 08:53 am JST
No.
SuperLib
Serrano I have no idea why you are so hopeful for a no deal exit rather than a coordinated one.
Bintaro
And everybody was saying Theresa May was the worst prime minister ever...
This guys has been at this post for less than 3 months, and made it an even greater mess than it already became in the last 3 years.
Hilarious.
ksteer
English judges never said anything of the sort, they refused to hear the complaint stating it wasn't a matter for the courts to decide. That doesn't mean it is lawful, it's just like abstaining from a vote. It means they gave no decision whether it was or not.
If it's a binding referendum then yes. But this was a non-binding referendum, i.e its a survey
forzaducati
I am reading that the High Court in London ruled against a case, brought in front of them by some nitwit, that suspension of Parliament is a political matter and thus not a case for the courts to decide on. Instead of wasting the court’s time, they should lock up all those MPs trying to put a stop to Brexit in the Tower for obstructing democracy by completely ignoring the will of the people. At least those that took the trouble to get off their butts and vote in that referendum. The “mess” has been created by the remain camp for completely ignoring the result of the referendum, not May or Johnson. And those loonies in Brussels, who can’t stomach that there are people, many people in fact, who do not subscribe to their delusional policies and instead have been trying to punish the UK with all kinds of demands and threats. Some article in that Lisbon peace of paper leaves a provision for countries to leave the EU and nowhere is it mentioned that such a country would face punishment for wanting to do so.
forzaducati
And yes, it was a non binding referendum, but then PM Cameron said the government would respect the outcome. Why was nobody up in arms then?
kohakuebisu
Most of Boris Johnson's three months has been a recess, so all this wrecking has been in two weeks.
Yesterday's developments mean he's politicized and misled the Queen, which ultimately damages the monarchy, and the government knows that No Deal could be genuinely disastrous. The authorities have closed ranks and will do so again, so the Government will get away with the prorogation, not publishing all of Yellowhammer, and probably without publishing emails in which Dominic Cummings tells full Cabinet ministers to effing get in effing line, but it's still a result. It's more humiliation for the Government, to the amusement and benefit of its detractors, and the detriment of its supporters, if any of them are still listening.
Serrano
Serrano I have no idea why you are so hopeful for a no deal exit rather than a coordinated one.
I have explained this before, SuperLib. The only deal the U.K. can get from the EU is a bad one.
And no deal and coordinated are not mutually exclusive.
Simon Foston
forzaducatiToday 09:45 am JST
I stopped taking this comment seriously after those last three words.
Strangerland
Heh, if you really want to blow their minds, call it what it actually is: a poll.
Strangerland
And Boris made claims on buses that turned out to be false.
It's clear that there is no expectation of politicians to abide by their word. So the only thing that mattered was whether the referendum actually was binding.
It wasn't.
Sneezy
No deal is worse than a bad deal.
Leaving the EU is worse than staying in.
Boris is a charlatan that only dullards would be taken in by, just like Trump.
wtfjapan
Isn't it unlawful for the government to refuse to carry out the will of the people as expressed in referendums?
but it wasnt a referendum, it was a non legally binding vote, I think it may be time for a legally binding referendum on Brexit, votes should be 1. Stay. 2. leave without deal. 3. leave with deal. just a guess but iod expect the results to be very different this time round.
goldorak
Surely you mean 'destruction of the uk' right? No doubt the EU would take a financial hit from a no deal brexit (short term) but they'd be fine (as in 'ok') mid-long term. The UK on the other hand...
I keep reading (from eng pundits obviously) that a 'no deal brexit is as risky for the EU as it is for the uk' but it's not! The uk needs the EU more than euros need them, that's why the vast majority of uk businesses, ceo, bankers etc are against brexit let alone a no deal B and why many of your pollies (on all sides) have finally realised how far up shyt creek they are & are now doing everything possible to -at the very least- take no deal off the table.
Jimizo
Not everyone. I and a few others were saying it was Cameron but Johnson is looking good for the title.
I think Cummings might have got it the wrong way around. The ‘well-bred’ types like Cameron, Osborne and Johnson were/are absolute car crashes.
Useless shower of....This lot should stick to trashing restaurants instead of trashing the country.
Simon Foston
goldorakToday 11:49 am JST
Actually I think "destruction of the EU" might be closer the mark. Those Americans probably see the EU as a serious potential rival that should be broken up, but the "Brits" can be brought to heel by throwing Tory and Blairite politicians a few bones from time to time. Like the "fantastic" trade deal Boris Johnson has no doubt been told he'll get from Donald Trump - probably about five times in the same sentence.
PTownsend
Remember some of those 'American' anti-EU posters push the global far right agenda. They include those who during the US 2016 election parroted the Internet Research Agency's messages, like 'Hillary's no-fly zone means WW3'. Some praise Putin, and even have written he's a 'stud'. hee hee
Ascissor
The Toxits have given up on the union (of GB) anyway.
goldorak
@simon, oh ok, fair enough. i didnt see it this way.
For whatever reason i thought zichi was talking about JT's americans, not the us as a whole, my bad. (I dont think JT's americans really care about/like/or even hate europe or the uk tbh, they're just winding brits/euros up, which is fine i guess)
itsonlyrocknroll
So Sneezy
No deal is worse than a bad deal.
Leaving the EU is worse than staying in.
Let take a closer look at that. What is the technical theoretical outcome between No deal is worse than a bad deal.
Sector by sector ? Let reach beyond your one sentence wonder ideology......
Cooperation between the EU27 and the UK....
I will start the ball rolling........Police and judicial cooperation
A ‘no-deal’ brexit: police and judicial cooperation
https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/factsheet_police_and_judicial_coordination_final.pdf
Perhaps you can enlighten on ano-deal, bad deal scenarios to regulate citizens' rights, or maybe financial services?
I could pass on your comprehension, grasp and understanding of the subject matter on my team in Brighton?.
Toasted Heretic
And does that apply to NI/6 counties?
For example, do you think that leaving the EU will enhance the GFA? The border communities?
Was it right for Pence to tell Ireland to "respect UK sovereignty", the other day? A bit ironic, seeing as Ireland have been trying to negotiate in good faith for the last 3 years...
TheRat
Russia wants chaos, and Brexit was one of their ideas that they pushed relentlessly through social media. And boy, ole boy, are the Brits playing along with spectacular theater. Making it far more complex than originally designed. Yeah! Get out your popcorn for in October, there will be a out and out breakup, and the borders will be closed. Chaos will reign and the Russians will laugh. Tariffs, and import duties, and lines and lines of trucks at the border getting inspected. BUT...the conservatives will say, "no problem" and the economy will SOAR. This will teach the EU a lesson or two. I wonder how many years of misery the Brits will put up with before they get on their KNEES to beg back in. Any ideas?
itsonlyrocknroll
The business at our Brighton site carried out a full risk assessment of a clean break no deal Brexit finical services it is over a thousand pages in length with an additional technical draft,
Are the electorate to believe that more than 600 civil servants spent months drafting Yellowhammer and the result is a document of just five flipping pages ????..........And all frivolous assumptions, no technical background......It is a con
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/831199/20190802_Latest_Yellowhammer_Planning_assumptions_CDL.pdf
ClippetyClop
Are people still blaming this all on the Red Bus?
kohakuebisu
By the way, the big loser from publication of the No Deal assessment is Farage, who's boxed himself into a No Deal or nothing position and just been snubbed by the Tories who called him "not fit or proper".
In response to Yellowhammer, he's been reduced to the usual Project Fear ramblings and an "I've ... I've done trade deals for twenty years!" spiel that will convince no-one.
Referendum on May's Deal, which the British public reject, is the end game I see. The potential spanner is the Lib Dems, who may overcook it by going straight for revoke and splitting the opposition. They keep sneering at Labour in an unhelpful and unendearing way. To end this, it would be better to get the public to do the rejecting. Politicians can defy the will of the British public, but the public themselves cannot.
Toasted Heretic
For sure. Even the tories got it right there.
Spiv Farage campaigned in front of a "breaking point" poster that was reminscent of Nazi propaganda.
He said Enoch Powell's Rivers of Blood speech was correct.
He has spoken at far right AfD rallies in Germany.
He is friends with white supremacist Steve Bannon.
albaleo
As Scottish and English law are separate, I guess both could be correct. I don't think you are the only one who is confused. I certainly am. Could the Supreme Court also find that both rulings were correct? That could be interesting.
Jimizo
No-policies Nigel is capitalizing, and has always capitalized, on successive governments’ failure to get immigration under control which is something a majority of the country wants.
Regardless of what happens over Brexit, I don’t think this problem is going away and I can imagine something worse than Farage emerging.
Simon Foston
forzaducatiToday 09:45 am JST
The High Court did nothing of the sort.
albaleoToday 04:01 pm JST
The Court of Session made a ruling, the High Court threw the case out. It's more a question of which court made the correct call whether to hear the case or not.
Madverts
Fatty is toast...
albaleo
I don't think it's so simple. It's possible that both could be correct if different laws apply in Scotland and England. Concerning the relationship between the monarch and parliament, I understand there are some differences. In this case, I think it's mainly about whether the government can lie to the queen in order to stymie parliament. So far, one court says yes and the other no.
Serrano
No deal is worse than a bad deal.
Leaving the EU is worse than staying in.
No, and no.
As if the UK is helpless without the EU, unable to forge independent trade deals.
Of course they can. And will.
Madverts
Trump supporting morons really should not opine on Brexit. One of them I know did not even understand the Chinese tariffs he was cheering on. That is certainly a special kind of stupid.
Simon Foston
albaleoToday 09:00 pm JST
Not really. The Court of Session is saying yes and the High Court is refusing to say anything.
In other words, "nothing to do with us. Take it somewhere else."
SerranoToday 09:01 pm JST
Just like your Dear Leader Mr. Trump says, right? That's your angle here, isn't it. If no-deal Brexit goes ahead there'll be a barrage of tweets from Trump taking all the credit for himself and you'll parrot every single one.
Simon Foston
Simon FostonToday 11:05 pm UTC
albaleoToday 09:00 pm JST
I mis-read that comment a bit. It's the Court of Session that's saying no.
albaleo
@Simon
I don't see it that way. The High Court is saying it is not justiciable (new word for me), so it is throwing out the case. Is it not saying the government's action is not subject to court procedures therefore it is legal? The original Court of Session hearing took the same position. The subsequent hearing took the opposite view and declared the government's action illegal.
I'm wondering if that means Johnson could be arrested if he set foot in Scotland. :-)
(I am not an expert on these matters and find it hard to follow. The media are not exactly helpful in explaining things. They prefer quoting people who are perhaps as ignorant as I am.)
arrestpaul
Which was made binding by Article 50. G.B. is now being run by it's third government since this "non-binding" referendum became law. While some on the internet are quick to dismiss the non-binding referendum/binding legislation as unimportant, G.B. legislators have gotten their knickers into a twist over how, or whether, to carry out the will of the people.
Meanwhile, does it really matter what different lower courts rule? The issue is being appealed to a higher court.
Strangerland
What? No it wasn't. It was non-binding then, and is still non-binding now.
Remember, it was a poll. Seems weird you are so focused on the results of a poll. Are you suddenly a supporter of polls now?
Simon Foston
arrestpaulToday 05:23 am JST
Parliament can vote to revoke Article 50.
albaleoToday 12:32 am JST
@Simon
I think the view is that the legality of what Johnson is doing is for someone else to decide. The courts don't make the laws.
arrestpaul
That must be why G.B. has had three governments since the results of this non-binding referendum/poll was announced. I guess the British people, British voters, and British legislators simply haven't been made aware that they can now simply ignore the referendum, ignore Article 50, and ignore the changes in government.