The Government’s plan may mean a change from the Court to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council – widening the set of judges who sit.
Posts by Professor Richard Ekins
Professor Richard Ekins is a Fellow of St John’s College and an Associate Professor in the University of Oxford. He leads Policy Exchange’s Judicial Power Project.
The fifth of a series of pieces from Policy Exchange looking at specific issues that arise from the Brexit trade deal.
Richard Ekins: How the Supreme Court has empowered Gerry Adams to sue the Government – and seek damages
Worse, its judgement has knock-on implications for the effectiveness of government. Urgent corrective legislation is needed.
Richard Ekins: Judicial power and the election. Can the next Parliament reverse the rise of political litigation?
This is the first of a three-part ConHome mini-series from Policy Exchange on the judges, public policy and the election.
Courts should not interefere in Parliamentary processes, it is not their role, and the Supreme Court has no power to quash the prorogation.
Lord Reed’s presidency will hopefully lead to a return to a humbler, more traditional approach to the balance between the judiciary and Parliament.
Northern Ireland Bill 2) Richard Ekins and Stephen Laws: Grieve’s plan to prevent prorogation is too clever by half
If MPs want to disrupt the constitution and limit prerogative powers, they should say so in terms, not indirectly with a nudge and a wink.
Richard Ekins: The real meaning of Cox’s advice. There is only a theoretical risk of being trapped in the backstop.
A number of important points about his view have been overlooked or misunderstood by some MPs and commentators.
Gunnar Beck and Richard Ekins: The Government is right to reject indefinite ECJ jurisdiction after Brexit
The European Court of Justice has always played fast and loose with the law to drive forward EU integration.
Richard Ekins: The Charter of Fundamental Rights gives judges too much power, and is bad for accountable government
Labour’s newfound enthusiasm for it is hard to square with its nature or history – including the history of how it was opposed by Tony Blair.
The second part of our mini-series on the growth of judicial power.
One constant risk to our constitutional settlement is that courts will go too far in reviewing executive action – that they will promote the rule of judges under the guise of the rule of law.
The Supreme Court’s most important constitutional law decision this year was dangerously wrong.