impact of SC on legislature and policy making process Flashcards
describe the role and composition of the supreme court
way in which judges interpret laws set legal precedent=provides basis for British common law=
cases in which law are uncertain go to SC=followed in future cases
-used to be in HOL 12 law lords breached the principle of separation of powers =part of Blair gov to modernise constitution consitittuional reform act 2005 passed=removed them to SC
-new court has 12 senior justices=more open to public scrutiny=jurisitiction reaches uk apart from scotland who has high court justicary
final court appeal=authroiity to decide if issue goes to SC or devolved body=membership determined by selection commison made by senior judges =justice secretary=who can decline nomination
should be neutral
decribe the neutrality and independence of the supreme court
most justices have been privately educated and attended oxbridge rarefied experiances=ill-suited to interpretating laws contemporary setting men domiante in 2019 just 3 female judges =led to claims that they favour the establishment=1979 Thorpe conspiracy to murder Scott=judges summary prejudiced scott=gay stable boy not part establishment
-gov also has some political influence over appointment=justice sec=cases like brexxit and human rights gain high publicity=risks it being pulled into political disputes
neutral=2009 housed in SC=judges cant be members of political party=salaries not determined by gov=senior gov cannot be removed by gov=removed HOL=made appointments more transparent as commission decides=pick merit character and diversity =contrast to US were president picks =court cases generally open to public and judgements are in public domain=prejudices quickly publciised by media=case is heard its sub judice=parliament cannot express an opinion breach branches powers and stop judical independence
Gina Miller cases =mps claimed pm privaledge meant could not be tried criminal court SC denied=some claimed too liberal=mp Blunkett over stopping him limit rights asylum seekers
-confront gov=Rwanda case R v Chancellor 2017=UNISON TU=gov intro employment tribunal fees was unlawful=SC agreed =neutrality Abu Qatada=no one no matter how dispicable is excluded from ECOHR
to what extent does the supreme court influnce the executive and parliament
Since no codified constitution SC no higher law=less powerful US SC
determine laws=determine the extent to which Human Rights act impacts on individuals relations to state=P vChester Weest=man down syndrome and cerebal palsy placed in care limited personal freedom sc sided with him =gov responsable for suitable accommodation
deciding if public body acted ultra vires=in 2016 Justice secretary Grayling acted ultra vires amended legal aid act to restirct civil legal aid to people who lived abroad 12 months =should have been debated parliament no authroity to intro it secondary leg
determining location sovereignty=Gina Miller case 2017=gov didnt have authroty to carry out article 50=parliaments responsability to enact leg could not been done without consent parliament =daily mail enemies of people cover=brexiteers saw it as trying to subvert ref
clarfifed if SC can declared royal prerogative=gov must consult parliament when abolishing rights=ref could give gov more power refted as ref not legally binding
incompatibility HRA= judges can issue formal statement of incapatability with HRA but cant strike laws down=put pressure to amend it=Belmarsh case 2004=hold foriegn terror suspects without trial=agaisnt HRA=monitored them in different manner=moral influence parliamenty infleunce is more powerful
