Hello, Dinah!

The president’s crimes The oldest constitution in the world was not made for the political culture of modern America. The Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v United States is a symptom of its crisis

An excoriating analysis of the dire state of the US Supreme Court, by Lord Sumption, former UK Supreme Court Justice and Honorary Fellow of Magdalen.

www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/world/north-...

National Security and the Law - David Anderson QC Lawyer London UK "National Security and the Law" was the subject of this year's Birkenhead Lecture. It contains a description and assessment of the current state of our law on counter-terrorism, hostile state activity...

... and (3) National Security and the Law www.daqc.co.uk/2022/11/19/n... /3

Writing a Constitution - David Anderson QC Lawyer London UK I gave a lecture last night to the Statute Law Society on the subject of Writing a Constitution. Our constitution is sick (though its condition is chronic rather than acute); a written constitution is...

... (2) Writing a Constitution (revised version to be published in Public Law this October) www.daqc.co.uk/2023/12/01/w... ... /2

The Lords and the Law - David Anderson QC Lawyer London UK What use is the House of Lords? What contribution is made by peers with experience as lawyers and judges? How could the Lords be reformed, and does it make sense to speak of the intention of Parliamen...

If you are wondering whether to follow and want to know the sort of thing I do, here are recent lectures on (1) the House of Lords and the Law www.daqc.co.uk/2022/11/19/t... .../1

The Labour Party adopted this approach in 2015, the conservatives around turn of century, so not a development that coincided with the development of democracy.

Delighted you are here. This place has exceeded expectations in my first 24 hours. But needs more institutional (e.g. parliamentary) accounts - and [ducks] more conservatives.

Until relatively recently, this was the way our constitution worked.

Democracy is about having a roughly equal right to choose those that govern. It was therefore much more democratic for those who had been elected to represent the people of this country to choose Rishi Sunak as Prime Minister than for 172,000 Con party members to choose Liz Truss.

Coda to this. Whist there are differences, it is notable that John Swinney was appointed FM without a party vote after the short-lived Yousaf ministry, presumably to avoid another divisive leadership contest amongst party members; similarly, Sunak was appointed by MPs agreeing, to avoid party vote

Yes I agree. It’s a sort of softball version at the moment

Labour could strip members of vote in future leadership contests Allies of Sir Keir Starmer want to change the way the party elects its leader if it is in power, in a move being called the ‘Liz Truss lock’

Labour could strip members of vote in future leadership contests : I appear not to be the only one who thinks party members should not vote on leaders midterm: it’s inconsistent with constitutional principle.

www.thetimes.com/article/3109...

Yes Adam - a rule whereby a parliament nominates a first minister achieves much the same as the governing party’s MPs choosing. And imagine how inappropriate it would be if all the MPs agreed a contract with party members by which they would vote for the person chosen by party members

As far as I can tell, political parties are essentially private member’s clubs and can do whatever the heck they want to. See: expelling members en masse on fake pretext ahead of Corbyn’s 2nd leadership election. (Of which I was one…)

Tom Hickman · Short Cuts: Outside Appointments In a report published in 2010, the House of Commons Public Administration Committee warned that the prime minister’s...

More on this and the constitutional issues around appointing ministers from outside Parliament, here (partly paywalled I’m afraid) : www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v4...

The issue was not as obvious when Johnson was appointed as it was mid Brexit crisis and the Con Party was fractured and a minority administration. May was effectively appointed by MPs without a party election.

The radical policies she had promised to members quickly resulted in MPs withdrawing their support from her and Sunak was appointed without another members vote.

Because constitutional principle requires the King to appoint the individual most likely to command the confidence of the Commons, not party members. The issue arose starkly when Liz Truss was appointed PM, when Sunak had the support of Conservative MPs.

I’ve recently been seeking to explain why the rules that the political parties now have for choosing party leaders by vote of members operate inconsistently with constitutional principle as well as being contrary to the public interest, at least when prime ministers are replaced mid term. Why?

Good evening Bluesky. I’m giving this a try, learning the ropes and now in an echo chamber very helpfully created by @seanjones.org - for which many thanks indeed. Hoping to reach out beyond lawyers to advance a little here and there the understanding of legal issues.