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: 3, Interesting) by PiMuNu on Wednesday September 25 2019, @05:11PM (5 children)
> Are they all becoming lawless?
There is plenty of precedent for prorogation of UK parliament to prevent a distasteful law coming into effect, so the concept that this is a "new" or "lawless" thing is wrong.
Actually, it is quite interesting that the judiciary felt they had the power to step in and tell the legislature that they *had* to sit. That is rather an exceptional event, and arguably overreach by the judiciary.
* Disclaimer: I am swing/brexiter, but also have some knowledge of history.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday September 25 2019, @10:52PM (4 children)
Is there? I can't find any.
(Score: 3, Informative) by PiMuNu on Thursday September 26 2019, @08:40AM (3 children)
Wikipedia to the rescue!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prorogation_in_the_United_Kingdom [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday September 26 2019, @08:13PM (2 children)
It doesn't look like plenty to me.
A few times would be my characterisation, in fact 6 times. Almost all of them to cover up some sort of corruption too.
One of which produced this:
Which Boris may never have read.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Friday September 27 2019, @08:16AM
I don't think anyone is proposing use of the suspending power.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 29 2019, @10:33AM
While Supreme Court justices never read article 9
In modern English