The ECJ expedites the decision on the #Brexit case - and will publish a judgment before Parliament votes. So is it ... a political court? (Thread)
Courts fulfill a function - protecting the rule of law. Sometimes they need to act quickly to do so. A UK court, a German court, a French court can issue a ruling lightening-fast if things are going badly - think: arrest, extradition etc.
The Scottish court here argues that a declaratory decision is needed to inform MPs about what the law says. That was a UK court.
The ECJ is only able to assist the referring court if it decides before parliament votes.
So deciding on the 10 is precisely why proceedings here were expedited. If you bring a last-second court challenge before someone is extradited, you expect the court to rule BEFORE the extradition. Hopefully.
And note that the UK courts did the very same thing in Miller - they tried to resolve the issue (and the government too), so that #Brexit notice could be given respecting the conditions of the law. This is what’s happening here.
There’s a longstanding debate in constitutional law to what extend courts should be involved in sensitive constitutional matters. But it’s difficult in that regard to find a good line to draw (see the US political question doctrine, which is decidedly not a meaningful line)
I for one am both surprised at the speed and happy that MPs get to see the judgment before the vote. Having only the nonbinding opinion but not the final outcome was not a good proposition.
