Evaluate The View That The Supreme Court Operates With Sufficient Judicial Neutrality And Independence.

Question 1

P1: Agree Rules In Place

Answer 1

1. There are a number of different rules that Supreme Court justices have to follow to ensure they remain neutral when exercising the law, many of these were included in the 2005 Constitutional Reform Act.
2. A judge has to have served as a senior judge for 2 years, or been a qualified lawyer for at least 15 years and their elevation to the SC is
   based on their past performance and experience, in which they have been neutral.
3. President of the Supreme Court Lord Robert Reed, for example, has served as a senior judge since 1998.

Question 2

P1: Disagree Not Representative

Answer 2

1. Of the current 12 justices: 10 are male, 11 are white, 11 have studied at Oxbridge, 12 are 60 or
   over and the majority went to private schools.
2. The fact that the court only had one female member was significant in the case of ‘Radmacher v Granatino’ 2010. The unrepresentative makeup of the Supreme Court impeded its
   ability to be neutral.
3. Could be argued that irrespective of the Supreme Courtʼs composition, they are still neutral as they base very decision in law and simply implement the law.

Question 3

P2: Agree Independence

Answer 3

1. Before the CRA, the Law Lords were within the legislature and the Lord Chancellor appointed senior judges whilst being a government minister and chairing sitting in the House of Lords.
2. HoL is now chaired by the Lord Speaker and Supreme Court justices are now appointed by an independent 5-member Judicial Appointments Commission and the judiciary is headed by the most senior member of the Supreme Court, who is known
   as the ‘Lord Chief Justiceʼ.
3. Judges can’t be removed from office unless they break the law or are impeached by a vote in both houses of parliament. Official retirement age of
   70.
4. Judges’ salaries are paid automatically from an independent budget known as the consolidation funds, which canʼt be manipulated by the government and they are paid well
   so that there is less incentive for them to be influenced by financial pressure from political actors.The current salary of Supreme Court justices is £226,193.
5. Sub judice rules prevent members of parliament, government ministers and the media from publicly speaking about impending or ongoing legal proceedings.

Question 4

P2: Disagree Media Scrutiny

Answer 4

1. Two key cases in relation to Brexit (the Article 50 case and the Prorogation case), the work of the SC has become increasingly high profile and politicised in recent years.
2. Whilst various parts of the media and politicians, including government ministers, have commented on and
   criticised the decisions of the court.
3. Sunak criticised the ruling (Rwanda) in the media. Even though he knows full well the court isnʼt a foreign court, he said in the wake of the ruling “Iʼve also been clear that I wonʼt allow a foreign court to block us from flights
   taking off. My patience is worn thin, the British peopleʼs patience is worn thin.ˮ
4. Starmer was criticised by by Lady Chief Justice Carr (head of the judiciary but not on the Supreme Court) in early 2025 after he stated that a judicial decision regarding the resettlement of a Gazan family in the UK was “completely wrongˮ and that a legal loophole would be closed as a result.

Question 5

P3: Disagree Brexit Both Independence and Neutrality

Answer 5

1. High Court ruled in November 2016 that the consent of Parliament was needed to trigger Article 50, which officially started the process of Brexit, the Daily Mail ran the headline ‘Enemies Of The Peopleʼ with pictures of the 3 high court judges, suggesting that they were defying democracy and the wishes of 17.4M Brexit voters.
2. After BJ 19 ,various right wing commentators and Johnson allies described the Supreme Court
   judges as ‘arch-remainersʼ.
3. Critics argue that the SC was not acting with sufficient judicial neutrality
   and was influenced by anti-Brexit views that were common among those with high levels of education. Article 50 and Prorogation cases were examples of the SC seeking to interfere too much in politics and limit the actions of a democratically
   elected government

Question 6

P3: Agree Brexit

Answer 6

1. Even though they may have made the Brexit process more difficult, they were simply upholding the constitution.
2. SC seeking to interfere in political and stop the wishes of a
   democratically elected government, they were simply upholding the law against a government that was seeking to act ‘ultra viresʼ
3. Article 50 case, they were right to require Parliamentʼs consent as triggering Article 50 and starting the process of leaving the EU involved the removal of rights conferred by
   parliament (passing the 1972 European Communities Act.
4. SC simply prevented Boris Johnson from avoiding parliamentary scrutiny.