To be honest, I'm not surprised. The courts in the UK interpret law made by parliament, I assume taking in consideration treaties like ECHR, EU, WTO, International Maritime agreements, etc that the UK's signed up to. As the UK has no written constitution it's difficult for the courts to judge this. Also, my understanding is that proroguing is a royal act and I'm not sure as the courts represent "Regina" they have authority? In the case of the A50 invocation I think the court was able to determine that it was unlawful because parliament hadn't followed a process it had defined for itself. Can't remember exacty, anyway I'm not a lawyer, so that's just a lay person's view. It doesn't mean Johnson isn't a manipulative, undemocratic wanna be dictator who, judging by recent pictures, wants be heading up a police state. Even his own family, who should know him best, seem to indicate that?
Michael Ixer ● 2623d