There are good reasons for placing all this in the “too difficult” box. But if Brexit was about anything, it was about sovereignty.
The Lord Chief Justice’s recent attack on the Lord Chancellor is unprecedented. Is she right for the job? Or is the job itself flawed?
Whatever the outcome, MPs and peers must be able to have their say in the lobbies.
It’s hard to see how hearings in front of MPs and peers would address the issues raised by those concerned about judicial activism.
There is plenty to dislike about the US system, but we’d do well to learn from it – if only to avoid travelling a similar road.
The First Minister has talked her way into a tricky bind over a second independence referendum. Contriving a Holyrood poll could be her least-worst option.
“The Article 50 process must and will involve a partnership between parliament and the executive. But that does not mean that legislation is required simply to initiate it.”
“The Government cannot trigger Article 50 without an Act of Parliament authorising it to do so.”
The claimants deserve their day in court. Ministers were right to appeal. And we will still leave the EU.
Otherwise he risks leaving future governments even more at the mercy of the courts than they are at present.
Further details enclosed.
The improper expansion of judicial authority is hindering our military and intelligence services in the defence of the realm.
My new book lays out a plan for a phased repatriation of power which will secure our sovereignty while maintaining links with our allies.
Expert input is essential to good government, but the abdication of political decisions to ‘impartial’ authorities is not. Let’s take back control.
“The report is wrong to assert that withdrawal puts the future of rights protection in doubt.”