Why pruning the British judiciary’s powers will prove tricky
The government’s new attorney-general wants to “take back control” from judges she sees as overmighty
ENGLISH JUDGES are used to obscurity. Unlike their American counterparts, even the most senior can count on being recognised only in the warren of streets between High Holborn and the Thames that comprise London’s legal quarter. Their fondness for Latin does not help.
That changed last year when the Supreme Court ruled that Boris Johnson’s decision to suspend Parliament—prorogation, in the jargon—for five weeks was unlawful. Brenda Hale, the court’s then president, delivered the judgment live on television. Soon afterwards, a children’s book about “Judge Brenda” was published, declaring her “equal to everything”. The Guardian pronounced the spider brooch she wore to read the judgment the year’s “most potent accessory”.
This article appeared in the Britain section of the print edition under the headline "Judging the judges"
Britain February 22nd 2020
- Why pruning the British judiciary’s powers will prove tricky
- Will Britain lose the Elgin marbles?
- Britain’s post-Brexit immigration rules worry business
- Why Britain isn’t Canada
- With money tight, competition between Britain’s unions is getting dirty
- British ministers come and go almost as often as football managers
- The rise of Britain’s woke members’ clubs
- Britain’s imperial prime minister
From the February 22nd 2020 edition
Discover stories from this section and more in the list of contents
Explore the editionMore from Britain
A growing number of Britons are on disability benefits
The government’s attempts to cut the welfare bill miss the bigger picture
British farmers shunned green schemes. Then the rain came
A rare Brexit dividend
Questions grow over the future of the London stockmarket
More than 20 listed companies are facing bids. Others are mulling their options