Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
It strikes me that the SC might be asking the question as to what law had been broken by Boris. Surely there would have to be a law tobreak for anything to have been unlawful?
|
That is a key aspect of the government’s case. Parliament has legislated on certain aspects of prorogation, but it has never legislated on this issue. Therefore there is, deliberately, no law here - only political judgement. This is non-justiciable.
I suspect their lordships are going to choose not to intervene here, except perhaps to point out that parliament could, and probably should, legislate in this area. That is the ruling already reached by two of the three courts that have heard the case.