SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49810261
Boris Johnson's decision to suspend Parliament was unlawful, the Supreme Court has ruled.
Mr Johnson suspended - or prorogued - Parliament for five weeks earlier this month, but judges said it was wrong to stop MPs carrying out duties in the run-up to Brexit on 31 October.
Supreme Court president Lady Hale said "the effect on the fundamentals of democracy was extreme."
[...]Delivering its conclusions, the Supreme Court's president, Lady Hale, said: "The decision to advise Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament was unlawful because it had the effect of frustrating or preventing the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions without reasonable justification."
Lady Hale said the unanimous decision of the 11 justices meant Parliament had effectively not been prorogued - the decision was null and of no effect.
She added that it was important to emphasise the case was "not about when and on what terms" the UK left the EU, but about the decision to suspend Parliament.
Speaker of the Commons John Bercow said MPs needed to return "in light of the explicit judgement", and he had "instructed the House of Commons authorities to prepare... for the resumption of business" from 11:30 BST on Wednesday.
(Score: 2, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday September 25 2019, @03:11PM (14 children)
With treason, the question is whether you get away with it or not. Isn't history filled with edicts, commands, and authority that was openly flouted? Maybe I'll go watch that movie again. 300, in which Leonidas tells a (self appointed) demigod to come and TAKE his weapons away from him.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday September 25 2019, @03:22PM (13 children)
Can't remember who, but I believe there was a president who made a similar challenge to a supreme court ruling. Something to the effect of, *let them come and enforce it*
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DannyB on Wednesday September 25 2019, @03:25PM (9 children)
There was this one guy once . . .
"Here i stand with my bayonet, there you stand with your laws. We'll see which prevails" A. Hitler
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by EJ on Wednesday September 25 2019, @03:36PM (5 children)
He wasn't wrong. He was just an asshole.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday September 25 2019, @04:03PM (4 children)
I think he was wrong.
Societies, even tribes, create laws for a reason. Since recorded history.
Just having a weapon doesn't make one right.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 3, Touché) by fustakrakich on Wednesday September 25 2019, @04:20PM (1 child)
When you have a weapon, you don't have to be right. Yet, you still need them if you want to enforce the law
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2, Interesting) by pTamok on Wednesday September 25 2019, @08:05PM
I think that has been said simply as "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." [wikipedia.org]
Politics makes for strange bedfellows sometimes.
(Score: 2) by EJ on Thursday September 26 2019, @05:44AM (1 child)
Assuming God exists and created the entire universe, go try telling Him He's not right.
Power makes one "right" because they get to define what "right" means.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday September 26 2019, @01:55PM
See the book of Job in the Bible.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 25 2019, @06:59PM (2 children)
Considering he took poison and put a hole in his head to avoid standing before a court of "law", I think we know what prevailed.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 25 2019, @08:57PM (1 child)
Law? If ever there was a better example of rule of man over rule of law than war crimes trials, I have not seen it. That's not to say he didn't deserve to be kept alive until he died of old age and used to devise ever more painful methods of torture but there is nothing remotely law-like in the trials the Germans received after WWII except cosmetically.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by aristarchus on Thursday September 26 2019, @06:48AM
Scared, Buzzard? Like most US vets? The Nuremberg Tribunals were constituted against the objection of the lawless Brits, who just wanted to take all the Krauts out behind the shed, and shoot them, something they later did in Africa, a lot. No, it was the Americans, and other civilized nations, that insisted we have trials, with, you know, evidence and stuff on record, to establish a precedence in International Law. One Supreme Court Justice from the United States even took a sabbatical to serve on the tribunal, Robert H. Jackson [wikipedia.org], to do what real lawyers do, stand up for the rule of law.
Now, under the Rogue and Illegal Bush Administration, with its policy of aggressive wars of discretion, the United States sought to form side-agreements with as many nations as it could to release its own war criminals from the jurisdiction of the logical outcome of the Nueremberg Tribunals, the International Criminal Court [icc-cpi.int], established by the Rome Statute of 1998. Of course, only a rouge nation, intent upon using force in international relations, contrary to The UN Charter, Chapter 1, Article 2, Paragraph 4: [wikipedia.org]
Yes, America is a lawless nation as well. They seem to have learned it from the Brits. And now the Brits are seeking to be lawless even against their own laws, as the pathetic Donald is as well.
Real Americans stand for the rule of laws, not men. They reject oaths of loyalty to persons, and instead swear to defend the law. Which side are you on, Buzzard? And, remember, "War crimes: no statue of limitations, universal jurisdiction." Watch your back. And your front. And both sides.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Arik on Wednesday September 25 2019, @06:18PM (2 children)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worcester_v._Georgia
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-cherokees-vs-andrew-jackson-277394/
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 26 2019, @06:53AM (1 child)
Worst president ever! Until Bush. And then still worse president ever, until Trump. Trump trumps all the worst presidents ever! He is like the greatest worst president! A category five worst precedent, even though I have never heard of a category five, and the couple of times I did, well, just having a nice conversation with a world leader, you gonna impeach over that? Joe Biden shot first! (Jackson was known for the same tactic that Han Solo pulled. Tenneesseanians, can't trust 'em.)
(Score: 2) by Arik on Thursday September 26 2019, @07:10AM
Nah. Can't agree with you there. Since Reagan, perhaps. "
Trump is hlarious.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?