The Court made a very thorough review of all the applicable laws in its carefully reasoned 88-page ruling, which you can read here if you have a couple of hours to spare. Or you can read a much shorter W\ikipedia summary here. I am no lawyer, but despite some banner headlines in the world's press, it seems to me that the Court has confined its ruling to the interpretation of the law as it stands right now, and has not set a sweeping change in stone.
But what do I know. This ruling will have far-reaching effects in British law. However, my fellow Americans should understand that Britain has no written constitution as we do; instead, the fundamental legal principle over there is parliamentary supremacy - meaning, Parliament can pass any law it wants to, on any subject, at any time. However, in actual practice, British lawmakers are effectively restrained by custom, tradition, political opposition, and public opinion.
(The King is technically part of Parliament, but he has no say-so. Contrary to what you may think, he does not run the government; the government runs him. He pretty much has to do whatever the Prime Mininster "advises.")
The Guardian provides an explainer of today's ruling here.
-----
No comments:
Post a Comment