Profile picture
Dominic Casciani
@BBCDomC
, 3 tweets, 1 min read Read on Twitter
Last word from the Supreme Court tonight: In answer to all the questions on the topic: We don't know when the 11 justices will rule - but we do not think it will take long given the importance of the issue.
Lady Hale, the SC president, has told the government she needs their written arguments by tomorrow on what ministers suggest the court should do, were they to be the losers. NOTE: This is often part of these types of cases - not a nod and wink about who's won)
Tomorrow the batting order is as follows - this takes us up to 3pm:
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to Dominic Casciani
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @BBCDomC see all

Profile picture
Dominic Casciani
@BBCDomC
Welcome back! The final session of the case against Boris Johnson closing down Parliament is starting at the Supreme Court. Lord Keen, the government's top law man in Scotland, begins his reply to the week's legal argument.
Lord Keen says that the entire case against the government is, quite simply, wrong because prorogation of Parliament is a political rather than legal issue.
Lord Keen: "What this court is being invited to do is control the length of the prorogation of Parliament... The length of each session of Parliament and their frequency are regulated by constitutional convention - not the law."
Read 27 tweets
Profile picture
Dominic Casciani
@BBCDomC
IMPORTANT: Government's submission to the Supreme Court tells judges that if they rule against Mr Johnson and quash prorogation of Parliament - he might just go and do it again:
Radio silence while I was reading the government's submission in full. Back to the hearing. Lord Garnier QC, for Sir John Major, now making his intervention for the former Prime Minister.
His submissions are a great read. Here are his examples of what a future dodgy PM could to if the Supreme Court does not intervene and rule this prorogation unlawful:
Read 8 tweets
Profile picture
Dominic Casciani
@BBCDomC
We're back. This afternoon at the Supreme Court: Aidan O'Neill QC for Joanna Cherry QC - defending their win against the Prime Minister at the Court of Session in Edinburgh. #Caseofthecenturyandallthat
He's explaining - for the benefit of London-based government and lawyers - why the Scottish court demolished the PM's prorogation of Parliament.
"One of the advantages that the [Edinburgh court] Inner House had that the High Court [London court] didn't is that of distance - a view from the periphery - what these political machinations look like 400 miles away - away from the Westminster bubble."
Read 34 tweets

Related threads

Profile picture
David Henig
@DavidHenigUK
Given all the activity, the briefing, the interviews and speeches, where do we stand in Brexit negotiations, I am asked... so I think an intended big week from the UK side has yet again gone wrong, revealing the continued weaknesses of not understanding the EU or Ireland... 1/
Last week the UK talk was all about all-Ireland SPS, and this seems to have been received well. Too well, in fact, sparking renewed talk of a Northern Ireland only backstop, which I'm sure wasn't the intention and was duly denied by the PM 2/
No problem per se with the idea of all-Ireland SPS solving some of the Brexit / Ireland issue - that's part of the backstop after all. The problem is only part, and whereas the EU are modestly encouraged with a UK step towards reality, the UK side I think believe it decisive 3/
Read 17 tweets
Profile picture
Joshua Rozenberg
@JoshuaRozenberg
Good morning. I’m not at the @UKSupremeCourt but I plan to follow the livestream all day and live-tweet the arguments. The court is hearing separate appeals that raise similar issues: is the PM’s advice to HM to prorogue parliament justiciable? And, if so, was it lawful? (thread)
It’s a three-day hearing so there won’t be any indication of the result before Friday. I’d say a result next week is more likely, perhaps will full reasons to follow. Today the 11 justices will hear from the appellants, who lost in the national courts. Tomorrow, the respondents.
This morning, Lord Pannick QC, for Gina Miller, will argue that the High Court of England and Wales erred in law by failing to find that the advice of the PM was an unlawful abuse of power. The court was also wrong to treat the case as inherently political and so non-justiciable.
Read 45 tweets
Profile picture
Hal Marshall
@HalMarshall2309
Packing the Supreme Court continues to pay off for the Trump administration. They have repeatedly taken the unusual step of appealing directly from district courts to SCOTUS, skipping the Courts of Appeal. The Republican 5 - 4 majority has repeatedly approved Trump's actions.
Once again, @jameshohmann has done an excellent job of reporting and analysis. Most laypeople likely have no idea how extraordinary it is for the government to directly appeal to the Supreme Court for relief during the middle of a case.
"President Trump won another significant immigration victory last night from the Supreme Court, and Justice Sonia Sotomayor sounds hopping mad." washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost…
Read 16 tweets
Profile picture
David Hamer
@DavidHamer_1951
Here’s a lawyer’s very long thread on much that’s wrong with the Ethics Commissioner’s report, assembled after a very close reading.
#cdnpoli @JustinTrudeau
Top lines:
▪️Result-selective reasoning
▪️Conflict of Interest Act misinterpreted
▪️Shawcross misinterpreted
▪️Irrelevant facts considered, relevant ones ignored
First, some principles:

The Conflict of Interest Act is meant to prevent the improper furthering of private interests by elected politicians, not to govern interactions between politicians and Attorneys General
Read 48 tweets
Profile picture
Sursdik
@SURSDIK
184. Why is access important?
185. What happened when HRC lost the election of 2016?
186. How much money was provided to the CF by SA during 15/16?
187. HRC lost.
188. Loss of access/power/control.
189. Does repayment of funds to SA occur? If so, how?
190. Why did BO send billions in cash to Iran?
191. Why wasn't Congress notified?
192. Why was this classified under 'State Secrets'?
193. Who has access to 'State Secrets'?
194. Where did the planes carrying the cash depart from and land?
195. Did the planes all land in the same location?
196. How many planes carried the cash?
197. Why is this relevant?
198. What does this have to do w/ NK?
199. What does this have to do w/ SA/CF cash donations?
Read 430 tweets
Profile picture
Timothy B. Lee
@binarybits
Court packing seemed crazy when I first saw people talking about it. But it is seeming less crazy to me as I think about it more. 1/
Republicans maintained their majority on the court by breaking the longstanding norm that the Senate should give Supreme Court nominees prompt consideration. This norm isn't in the Constitution but it was widely assumed to be a rule of the game prior to 2016. 2/
Now some liberals think Democrats should gain a majority on the court by breaking the longstanding norm that the court should have nine members. This norm isn't in the Constitution but has been respected since 1869. 3/
Read 7 tweets

Trending hashtags

#VA #News #TodayInSenatePlenary #QAnonSnopes #ThousandOaksShooting #WIGov #PAMFAM #NationalSecurity #CRSIS #Reparation #Operations #ClimateChange #Cincinnati #KAG #Trump #WISen #Reparations #Trump2020 #GaslighterInChief #ThanksObama #Fighter #GunRights #Borderline #Military #SCOWIS
Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!