The unconstitutionality of the Supreme Court's prorogation judgement

Document type
Discussion paper
Author(s)
Finnis, John
Publisher
Policy Exchange
Date of publication
28 September 2019
Subject(s)
Legislation
Collection
Social welfare
Material type
Reports

Download (1.5MB )

The Supreme Court’s judgment in Gina Miller's case on prorogation holds that Parliamentary sovereignty needs to be judicially protected against the power of the Government to prorogue Parliament. In this paper John Finnis argues that the judgment itself undercuts the genuine sovereignty of Parliament by evading a statutory prohibition (art. 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689) on judicial questioning of proceedings in Parliament.

More from Social welfare collection

Related to Legislation

Second-guessing policy choices: the rule of law after the supreme court's unison judgement

Report on the Supreme Court and employment tribunal proceedings

Global governance: the challenge to the UK's liberal democracy

This paper examines how global governance has influenced law and policy in the UK

Administrative justice and the parliament square axis

This paper considers the relationship between the Strasbourg Court, the domestic courts and administrative justice.

The stubborn stain theory of executive power: from magna carta to miller

This paper discusses the royal prerogative to commence the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union

More items related to this subject