Gotta love the times we live in. THREAD:
The case brought by Jo Maugham, Joanna Cherry et al has produced a surprise result at Scotland's Inner House court. Judges have deemed the PM's advice was unlawful. This is being celebrated by Remainers. 1/
The case brought by Jo Maugham, Joanna Cherry et al has produced a surprise result at Scotland's Inner House court. Judges have deemed the PM's advice was unlawful. This is being celebrated by Remainers. 1/
Firstly, the summary being circulated *is not the actual judgement*. That gets issued on Friday 13 September (unlucky for who, we can only hazard a guess). What we have here is a press release, issued, no doubt, by Jo Maugham & his merry Parliamentarians. 2/ 
Next, this is obviously being appealed. The Supreme Court scheduled emergency hearing on Gina Miller's case, the NI case & this one together on 17 September. As the arguments of the plaintiffs are essentially the same, this is a sensible use of overstretched court resources. 3/
Let's look at the wording of the PR summary of the Scottish judgement.
"The Court of Session has ruled that the *PM's advice* was unlawful because it had the purpose of stymying Parliament."
"All 3 judges decided the *PM's advice* is justiciable..." due to his motives. 4/
"The Court of Session has ruled that the *PM's advice* was unlawful because it had the purpose of stymying Parliament."
"All 3 judges decided the *PM's advice* is justiciable..." due to his motives. 4/
This ruling is the complete opposite of the 2 previous rulings in the Gina Miller case & this one. There, judges ruled that courts could not interfere in "matters of high policy & political judgement". Now, it seems they can if there are improper motives. Define improper. 5/
The judges have decided that Boris advised the Queen to prorogue Parliament "with a view to preventing sufficient time for proper consideration of the UK's withdrawal from the EU (#Brexit)".
This despite 3 years of Parliament considering Brexit & doing their best to stop it. 6/
This despite 3 years of Parliament considering Brexit & doing their best to stop it. 6/
"The circumstances in which the advice was proferred & the content of the documents produced by the respondent demonstrated that this was the reason for the prorogation." 7/
"...when the petiton was raised the question was unlikely to have been justiciable [but] the particular prorogation that had occurred, as a tactic to frustrate Parliament, could legitimately be established as unlawful." 8/
This is where it gets interesting. Lord Brodie seems to be suggesting that Boris's advice & prorogue was justiciable because he believes the spin by the ultra-Remain PR machine. Parliament has lost 4.5 sitting days; they could have spent their Summer hols debating #Brexit. 9/
Drummond also buys into the ultra-Remain PR output. The length of prorogation deemed to be to prevent Parliamentary scrutiny of Govt's #Brexit plans.
6 weeks of summer hols for MPs: fine; 4.5 days less of delaying tactics: catastrophic illegality. 10/
6 weeks of summer hols for MPs: fine; 4.5 days less of delaying tactics: catastrophic illegality. 10/
In a normal world, there'd be little doubt that the UK Supreme Court would reverse this decision & uphold that of the Gina Miller case.
Hands up, all those who trust courts to be unbiased regarding #Brexit. 11/
Hands up, all those who trust courts to be unbiased regarding #Brexit. 11/
What concerns me is this. If UK Supreme Court upholds Scottish decision, what's to stop anybody with money from challenging every single decision made by Govt? Don't like the Queen's Speech because austerity? Sue the PM. Hate McDonnell's budget? Ditto. /END
@threadreaderapp unroll please
For those who want the source of the summary: scotland-judiciary.org.uk/9/2261/Joanna-…
