{"version":"1.0","type":"rich","provider_name":"Acast","provider_url":"https://acast.com","height":250,"width":700,"html":"<iframe src=\"https://embed.acast.com/$/9a03fe9e-1ff0-4dcc-b3f6-50bd1f016ea4/cfede338-31bb-415e-ae61-534365446cc1?\" frameBorder=\"0\" width=\"700\" height=\"250\"></iframe>","title":"Supreme Court","thumbnail_width":200,"thumbnail_height":200,"thumbnail_url":"https://open-images.acast.com/shows/6195701f2eacc3a36070252a/619570bccb3c660012e3d142.jpg?height=200","description":"<p>In the middle of the epic prorogation battle at the Supreme Court, we ask what's at stake: for the government, for Brexit, for the constitution and for democracy.&nbsp;Is this a case of legal precedent, common law practice or higher constitutional principle?&nbsp;Is the UK constitution becoming more European in the act of leaving the EU?&nbsp;And what are the things lawyers on neither side can say?&nbsp;Plus we ask how Jo Swinson's case for revoking&nbsp;article 50 is going and we discuss whether we could really have a 2nd referendum without another general election.&nbsp;A packed episode!&nbsp;With Catherine Barnard, Helen Thompson and Chris Bickerton.</p><p><br></p><p>The prorogation case has reached the Supreme Court.</p><ul><li>Traditionally the courts are reluctant to second guess political decisions.&nbsp;</li><li>The high courts of England and Wales ruled that the case wasn’t justiciable. The Scottish court took a different line.</li><li>This case is really looking under the bonnet of the constitution.</li></ul><p><br></p><p>If there is no judicial control, the right to prorogue could be abused—this could trouble the courts.&nbsp;</p><ul><li>But according to the UK constitution, the recourse to the abuse of power is supposed to be political rather than legal.&nbsp;</li><li>The current executive is a constitutional zombie: it doesn’t have the support of Parliament.&nbsp;</li></ul><p><br></p><p>How does the court see its role?&nbsp;</p><ul><li>What Boris did may be outrageous, but it’s not clear what he gained by doing it. He squeezed options but he didn’t wipe them out.&nbsp;</li><li>Maybe they just did it to be provocative ahead of a general election. But neither side can say that.</li></ul><p><br></p><p>Who are the justices on the Supreme Court?&nbsp;</p><ul><li>Most of these people have worked their way up the judicial hierarchy.</li><li>This is only the second time that all 11 are sitting. They know this case is a big deal.</li><li>The big question is legitimacy.</li></ul><p><br></p><p>Common law has been seen as a central part of the UK’s constitutional history, and common law ultimately is meant to rest on an appeal to experience.&nbsp;</p><ul><li>What happens if it is used to assert an abstract principle?</li></ul><p><br></p><p>Across the board, politicians are no longer abiding by conventions.</p><ul><li>If Parliament were functioning properly, it would replace the executive.</li><li>Parliament chose to legislate against no deal instead of calling for a general election.</li><li>The Fixed-Term Parliaments act has been a game changer.&nbsp;</li></ul><p><br></p><p>Further Learning:&nbsp;</p><ul><li><a href=\"https://www.talkingpoliticspodcast.com/blog/2019/181-talking-politics-guide-to-the-uk-constitution\" target=\"_blank\">The Talking Politics guide to… the UK Constitution</a></li><li><a href=\"https://www.theguardian.com/law/2019/sep/17/supreme-court-grapples-dilemma-politics-versus-law\" target=\"_blank\">The Supreme Court and politics vs. the law</a></li><li><a href=\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om7DXbWt85w&amp;feature=youtu.be\" target=\"_blank\">Who is Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson?&nbsp;</a></li></ul><p><br></p><p><strong>And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: </strong><a href=\"https://www.lrb.co.uk/talking\" target=\"_blank\"><strong>lrb.co.uk/talking</strong></a></p>","author_name":"David Runciman and Catherine Carr"}