Supreme Court's Prorogation Ruling Explained (Podcast) - Brexit Explained

[@tharsisharmonia9316]

CORRECTION: Hey guys, you made a mistake on an important point wrt the number of justices. There are 12 all together, and 11 sat. Lord Briggs, who is an expert in commercial law, did not sit in order to prevent the possibility of a tie (11 being an odd number). This was, given that constraint, the maximum and that's where your explanation of the number comes in to play.

[@tharsisharmonia9316]

Down to work for you on a voluntary basis anytime - edit: I mean that in a sincere and appreciative way, as it occurred to me that this could have read as a jibe.

[@gentlemanvontweed7147]

@@tharsisharmonia9316 You just exposed yourself as a Remainer traitor who wants to assist in sabotaging the democratic process. Leave means leave. Britain for the British!

[@meemeli5842]

Thanks for clarifying!

[@meemeli5842]

@@gentlemanvontweed7147 wtf lol

[@Mondfischli]

@@gentlemanvontweed7147 ...and you just exposed yourself as either Russian troll or dickhead.

[@spoopytime9928]

Bojo: I'd rather be dead in a ditch than delay Brexit. Opposition: Then you shall be swimming with the Tesco trolleys.

[@TheCimbrianBull]

LMFAO! 😂 🤣 😅

[@bairdzone4636]

Seriously, will they kill him? It's starting to seem like that

[@seriousmaran9414]

@@bairdzone4636 we aren't savage monsters. ECHR would oppose it. Although I believe he should spend some time in prison. Rest of his natural life would do.

[@MrJstorm4]

Did Tesco have a tram?

[@seriousmaran9414]

@@MrJstorm4 not that I am aware of, but the cabinet might well throw Boris under the bus if he fails.

[@mufak]

Man, if you went on holiday with Thomas Cook, we are all fu....

[@AnnMarieKing]

Immediately crossed my mind ... lol

[@jh5401]

LOL

[@shaun1293]

Don’t Thomas Cook it, Just book it!

[@StrickerRei-Chn]

Yeah.... Fuck

[@mapicon7094]

Brexit new season trailer is looking dramatic

[@devangliya7131]

Hmm. What's up with this "season" analogy?

[@ERMediaOfficial]

@@devangliya7131 Running gag. I love it but to me this is the season 2 finale lasting until October 31st^^ I think it makes sense to split this whole thing into seasons - every season ends at the current Brexit date^^

[@jh5401]

I think I'm looking forward to Frozen II more

[@ypanso]

LOL! =)

[@Copyright_Infringement]

The second half of season 4 is coming sooner than expected?

[@fresetu]

Well done Ben & Zac! Thank you for keeping us updated!

[@R.a.t.t.y]

Surely if proroguing parliament is illegal, Jack's holiday is also illegal and it never happened. After all, taking holiday while parliament is not sitting has been ruled that parliament has effectively always been sitting. Are they planning to sit during the Tory conference as well?

[@czarzenana5125]

It wasn't illegal, it was unlawful.

[@gentlemanvontweed7147]

Stopping what the people voted for is also illegal. Leave means leave.

[@Aspartame69]

Indeed, by the same logic, mps were elected on manifestos to deliver brexit but because they have taken too long and their motives are now clearly contrary to what they promised, it can be considered a fact that the last 3 years of parliament is a blank sheet of paper and nothing they have done is lawful or even ever happened. We have already left the EU in march. Thank you supreme court for this radical now method of 'justice' where things can be illegal that are an integral part of our unwritten constitution.

[@R.a.t.t.y]

Czar Zenana Awww. Does that mean no guillotine?

[@bigbadjohn10]

Gentleman von Tweed No it is not! The referendum was only advisory. We have a parliamentary democracy, such decisions are exclusively within only their remit. The government can put forward proposals, but they can be rejected by parliament. Currently the government does not have a majority which has been made worse by Johnson removing the whip from a significant number of Conservative MPs.

[@Copernicus22]

No matter what happens with Brexit. It has created a divided, bitter UK and a slightly weakened EU. The only winners are the UK/EU's foreign enemies. Remember that, when you are tempted rage out at each other. You can see the same crippling polarization in the US. I think most people recognize the issues that caused the country to go into this direction. This might be the time to start listening to each other again and to start having a calm sensible discussion about where to go next.

[@joythought]

So true.

[@Krmpfpks]

Thank you. People on both sides of the argument are talking about ‚getting back control‘ without realizing they are handing over control by being divided.

[@abc68130]

Yep, Putin sure got his money's worth.

[@gentlemanvontweed7147]

We just put the HMS Price of Wales on trial in the Scottish sea. Imagine the destroyers we can build with the money we waste on the EU. Britain will regain it's naval hegemony and the EU will crumble.

[@munztere6426]

@@gentlemanvontweed7147 dude seriously r u a Russian troll or a dickhead

[@joze2003]

Couldn't focus on anything but this huge spider.

[@mirawenya]

It’s wings, not that it really makes it better

[@Elkott]

It's behind you

[@cherylw3661]

Look into what it signifies then you’ll understand the ruling.

[@mirawenya]

cheryl w look into what what signifies? Spiders or bugs? Cause it’s not a spider I think

[@aronrad]

If it's not a spider it is a very unfortunate angle or something. It's got 8 legs, can't interpret them as wings or anything else as hard as I try. Anyhow, not trying to project a message into it, which there may or may not be one. Oh and a small thing, if you stare at the silver spider for 5 seconds or more it will hijack your thoughts and haunt you forever. Oops. Ok, byeeee

[@Gredddfe]

I think the podcast is fine to have on youtube if you want to do both. It was just the mix of regular TLDR and the podcast in the same video which didn't work, because of the difference in pace.

[@deebefree]

Cheers Ben and Zac for keeping us in the loop while Tom squeezes the last bit of freedom of movement from his burgundy passport. You're the heroes we deserve.

[@InterjectionVideos]

I think you mean Jack!

[@deebefree]

@@InterjectionVideos my right honourable friend is absolutely right

[@NLTops]

ORDAHHHH! That's quite enough banter gentlemen. Next point of order, please. *points* Yes, the right honourable member for...

[@davidgaskin5417]

Oh no! We aren't allowed to travel after brexit?

[@iainmackie7064]

NB Unlawful and Illegal do NOT mean the same thing. Illegal means there is a law that specifically states something may not happen. ie speed limit is 60 mph. If you drive at 70 you are in breach of that specific law. That is illegal. Unlawful just means, generally, you are not allowed to do something, but the action is not actually specified within a law. It’s the interpretation of the law that makes the action forbidden. Like prorogation. It is not illegal to prorogue. But it is unlawful to prorogue for improper reasons. Unlawful, whilst bad, is not as bad as illegal.

[@cameronscott9399]

Yeah, basically (in my understanding) illegal is that it says you can't in the law, and unlawful is that it doesn't say you can. Though correct me if I'm wrong

[@JontyLevine]

Exactly. I would liken it to the difference between having your card declined at the till (in which case the purchase is declared null and void, but you haven't committed a crime) versus outright stealing the item (which is a crime, and punishable by law). There's an open question about whether there will be any (legal) consequences on Johnson for the -two- three weeks parliament was already prorogued for, but I'm given to understand the trial was not about that. And since they didn't officially know until yesterday that it was against the law, I expect they'll let him slide for it.

[@ShamanMcLamie]

What I'm wondering is what makes a politically motivated prorogueing unlawful?

[@iainmackie7064]

Cameron great explanation. 👍🏻👍🏻

[@cameronscott9399]

@@ShamanMcLamie basically the pm asks the queen to prorogue parliament so they can prepare a queens speech, basically a summary of what they want to do over the next parliamentary term, and then she signs off on it and the prorogation is in effect. The implication is by proroguing for political reasons Boris has lied to the queen

[@hafizajiaziz8773]

I remember "Captain America: Civil War" as a very entertaining movie. But "Brexit: Uncivil War" is also a very entertaining movie in a different sense. And now "Brexit The Series" is already in the 4th season, with a huge twist just revealed.

[@katerinamonemvasioti7403]

Thought this was by far the best of TLDR so far as we were only told to subscribe once, rather than the usual 15 times

[@peka2478]

YES please bump this up!

[@robindewaele1659]

Brexit is like a frat guy getting a drunking tattoo, waking up the next day and wondering if he should remove it or keep it as a reminder

[@aronrad]

Or C: keep it and say it was what he always wanted. Or D: all of the above. :D

[@88kappa]

A big thank you to Ben & Zac! You have done a great job. Thank you for keeping us updated while Jack is on a well-deserved vacation (btw being Italian, thumbs up for the location ;D )

[@zax1998LU]

When jack returns I want a 20min TL:DR video only on Jack's holiday.

[@TLDRnews]

You can also just follow my Instagram for too much holiday content 😅

[@doktorcool3740]

@@TLDRnews Too long, didn't check it all out... ;-)

[@mrdemocracy7106]

So its welcome back to the 'CARRY ON REMOANING HOUSE OF REMOAN' Full of Hysterical remainiac MP's with the help of the bias ant brexit remoaner speaker Bercow and the propaganda Brexit Bashing Corporation or Brussels Broadcasting Corporation. ITS THE 17.4 million PEOPLE & GOVERNMENT v THE UNDEMOCRATIC REMOANER PARLIAMENT

[@AndyK.1]

Now they are back I’m sure they will have it sorted in no time 😂

[@thedoughnutsayshello]

@@TLDRnews No, you will give it to us how we like it: Audibly. Live. For as long as we choose to listen.

[@helloim3j]

Plot twist: the hiatus was a hoax. Season 3 is back on full-bore!

[@jesuszamora6949]

There's still no guarantee that Europe will grant any extensions. They still only have a MONTH to go, even without the prorogation.

[@helloim3j]

@@jesuszamora6949 If you know something, please keep it to yourself. No spoilers for the season finale.

[@padraicmalone8047]

Jesus Zamora The EU’s interest is to grant an extension, and seemingly will to facilitate a General Election.

[@mirawenya]

Bercows comments when parliament was being prorogued doesn’t seem so bad now, surely? He was right!

[@HubertGamer]

When you go on holiday whilst parliament is prorogued because you think you won't miss much news

[@user-ov5nd1fb7s]

I hope the EU doesn't approve an extension. It has been 3 years already. You had the time to discuss. Enough is enough.

[@LuckyTiger25]

And the MPs found a solution? No! Il be straight honest I voted leave but I realised that we weren't even ready so I'd say let's forget everything support couple of years with EU and when we are ready to leave we call for a vote.

[@user-ov5nd1fb7s]

@@LuckyTiger25 the EU has to agree on the nature of the relationship. You can't just vote to do stuff and expect it to happen. The EU has its own interests.

[@obelic71]

The EU already said the UK goverment has to come with a plan before the 30th of September. Its like a divorce where family of one of the partners makes a normal divorce impossible. This is hurting the children badly (UK and EU citizens). just get it over with asap, at any cost!

[@OllieX123]

Okay but 3 years may not be enough to negotiate the withdrawal agreement.

[@CTCTraining1]

Lucky Tiger ... I thought that once upon a time (ie just unilaterally revoke Article 50) but then you lose the opportunity to negotiate leaving terms plus you would be bound into another multi-year budget deal. Only stay if we intend to make a go of it ... there is no guarantee the next lot of politicians involved will be any more competent than the last lot.

[@sclair2854]

You didn't cover Rory Stewarts absolute savagary on twitter? "Just in, Boris wont be taking the decision to the European Court"

[@tomlangford1999]

Brexiteers then: "The prorogation isn't about Brexit, it's about the Queen's speech" Brexiteers now: "WHY ARE THE JUDGES TRYING TO STOP BREXIT??"

[@finthegeek]

I think you maybe hallucinating no brexiteers are saying that

[@tomlangford1999]

@@finthegeek look at the front page of the express

[@Reynevan100]

Some lunatics will now say ALL judges are remainers, I bet!

[@gentlemanvontweed7147]

They are. I'm shocked that their sabotage of democracy has not been condemned as treason yet.

[@repairupdaterepeat5815]

Seen the front page of the daily mail? 😂

[@Reynevan100]

@@repairupdaterepeat5815 not...yet... :D

[@CedarHunt]

I've already seen it starting. From the looks of it thousands of Brexiters who were champing at the bit for a hard exit woke up and found out that the Supreme Court had ruled on the issue without even a moments consideration spared on their opinions. It must have been quite a shock to realize they weren't the center of the universe.

[@jmas1219]

@silverfoxeater Tony Blair wasn't in power when the Supreme Court was set up in 2009. Gordon Brown was.

[@MattyClivingthedream]

Brexiters are always in denial. Everything is always the EU's fault. At some point they have to see that if you vote for a stupid idea, support politicans without any plan to deal with that stupid idea, then you have no one to blame but yourself.

[@StYxXx]

"The EU made the politicans have no plan" :D

[@kevinallsop5788]

BREXIT is a brilliant idea - but we were too trusting. We thought that MP's were honourable people and would stand by their manifesto pledges. 2017 election - "We will deliver Brexit". "No deal better than a bad deal". They were liars. A Remainer PM and MP's are hardly likely to plan for leaving the EU if they are secretly plan to remain are they? May's deal is designed to keeps in. I live in an ex- mining area. In the local villages we still get echo's of the miners strike 30 tears ago because our local pits were classed as "scabs" pits. I can tell you now feelings are running a lot higher about being betrayed by our MP's who stood on Leave tickets and then turned out to be Remainer's than they ever were about the miner's strike. This will take at least a generation to cool down. You cannot deny democracy to 17.4 million people and then think they will forget overnight. The damage that Remainers have caused to this country's democracy and confidence in the electoral system is unforgivable. Is all Leavers ever wanted to do was Leave.

[@MattyClivingthedream]

@@kevinallsop5788 Thanks for proving my point.

[@kevinallsop5788]

@@MattyClivingthedream Hardly.

[@sidkemp4672]

Could you please do a background video on the implications of the UK Supreme Court declaring that the Prime Minister engaged in an illegal act? If he won't resign, might he be forced out of office, imprisoned, or penalized for his crime? If not, what is the significance of the ruling? And what if he does not send the letter requesting an extension, and again violates the law? Us folks in the US, and possibly some UK citizens as well, would want to understand the consequences a Prime Minister faces when a Supreme Court judgment is made that his action(s) are illegal.

[@czarzenana5125]

Supreme Court didn't rule it was an illegal act. What he did was unlawful (void, as if it never happened). Legally there are no consequences because Boris didn't break a law, but I am sure he will be roasted in parliament today for political reasons. If he doesn't send the letter he will be breaking the law and it's even possible (though not very likely) he'll end up in jail for that.

[@sidkemp4672]

@@czarzenana5125 Thanks. The distinction between unlawful and illegal was not clear to me. Would not sending the extension request to the EU be unlawful, or illegal?

[@ChizzAir]

To start with, we need to clarify that Boris acted 'unlawfully' not 'Illegally'. There is a slight difference between the two. Something illegal is expressly prohibited by legislation, and something unlawful is just not expressly authorised. To answer your question, Johnson has no legal obligation to resign and has not committed a criminal offence. He's not about to be locked up, or have some legal penalty for his actions. Being 'forced out of office' is a possibility, but that's something for his party to decide. Technically it's also something the Queen could be compelled to do, either of her own volition, or as a result of a 'Humble Address' from parliament. It's a political issue though, not a legal one. Now, if he refuses to send the letter on 19th and hasn't bypassed the requirement to do so (such as having a deal agreed by parliament), then that would be Illegal (as opposed to unlawful) and would be a criminal offence. He'd be in contempt of court and could potentially be imprisoned for it. Exactly what would happen in that situation is speculation, it's never happened before, but there is no way he would be allowed to continue as PM. I'm not going to comment on the 'significance of the ruling' as it's a more complex issue that is largely political and open to interpretation. The government will try to play down it's significance, whilst the opposition will play up it's significance. Glad you're enjoying the show over in the US and I hope I've answered your questions satisfactorily =) I enjoyed the premiere episode of 'Trump: The Impeachment Show' yesterday. I don't know what season you guys are on though, We've had a few dull seasons over there and I kind of tuned out for a while.

[@sidkemp4672]

@@ChizzAir Thanks, this is very helpful. The Trump show sounds way too much like the boring, repetitive blaring trumpets of Morgoth's Balrogs.

[@goodyKoeln]

Italy has a serious audio problem. Better leave the EU asap, this can’t be tolerated. 🙈

[@TLDRnews]

😂😂😂😂

[@IndiaTides]

I was against Brexit before your comment. I am now supporting. Thanks for enlightening me.

[@watashiikarashi]

Thank you for doing this in Jack's absence. It's always good to see the updates of Brexit in a 10 mins video. I am happy with this format and it would be wrong to ask for more given how fast you made the video. Well done Zac and Ben

[@aronrad]

No need to apologise guys for using podcast material. Its teamwork anyway and the show must go on! In fact, its good to mix things up a bit sometimes.

[@AzureAlliance31]

Much better that we got this instead of nothing. Good call. Also, screw the Tories and Brexit.

[@d.b.4671]

" *Unanimooous!* Fill the lobby!"

[@bruceh9780]

As many supreme court justices as are of that opinion say Aye. AYE The Ayes have it, the ayes have it. Unlock!

[@linuxares]

This is fine, I don't mind this as an "emergency solution". Jack needed to go on holiday just at the wrong time :P But man what a banger finale Season 4 is going to be!

[@joshyboy1983]

Canadian General Election rolling on, Trump Impeachment hearings & now this. MY GOD, this is a hell of a news week!

[@carterisalone]

I'm very glad you put out the podcast for this. Too important to miss!

[@duncanx99]

The prorogation of Paliament was ruled as 'Unlawful' - that is not the same as 'Illegal' and the two terms are not interchangeable. Please try and be correct if you wish to be credible...

[@nickwoodward819]

yup. very simply illegal breaks a law, unlawful means there's no law allowing it

[@stephenw181057]

07:35 No I don't think so: as I understood the ruling, it was NOT that they somehow determined Johnson's state of mind and motives in the prorogue (hardly a matter for legal points of law), but that the EFFECT of the prorogation was to stop parliament was carrying on the business of the nation at a crucial time.

[@Serfdomftw]

Well actually it only appears like that. The judgement was on a question on whether he had the authority to prorogue. The test for prorogation is whether he can justify prorogation. The court said that he had not provided any justification as to the reason (That is purposes) why it was being prorogued and therefore it was unlawful. So test of justification relies upon the reasoning behind the prorogation, which itself is not a justiceable matter, but its justiceable in this case because it defined the scope of the authority itself. The judgement is highly circular, and inevitably takes on a test that is political in nature. Hence the outcry and confusion.

[@needmorecowbell6895]

@@Serfdomftw The PM now does not know that if he calls for porogue, that it will actually happen. Any member of parliment has the standing to go to the courts and contest the prorogation? So, if the PM cannot be certain that he has the power, and parliment are not certain they have the power, and the courts can deny prorogation, but they can't ask for it, how does prorogation work and who has the power, outside the crown, to prorogue or ask the crown to prorogue parliment?

[@Serfdomftw]

@@needmorecowbell6895 If you believe that to be the case, then our constitution is even more fucked than I first thought. God forbid.

[@Jermbot15]

I don't think you can use the passing of a law directing Johnson to seek an extension as an argument that further prorogation is lawful for the simple reason that this law was passed before he prorogued this time, and it wasn't an issue. Since the ruling was about Parliamentary oversight, I cannot imagine proroguing a second time would work out any better.

[@swanskogjsson151]

As mrs Slocombe would say: - I’m unanimous about that!

[@BoojumFed]

I'm free! - MPs when asked to return to parliament.

[@ronrossbach8449]

The biggest issue with Johnson and Brexit that I see is that nobody has a plan that's any better. Everyone wants a plan, everyone wants to avoid a no deal, but nobody really knows how. And Corbin...well, let's just say that if the roles were reversed, he wouldn't do any better than Johnson is doing now. Let's hope the House of Commons as a whole can pick up the mess and work with it because leadership on both sides certainly can't.

[@Bustaperizm]

We don't have anyone to blame and feel superior to in that assessment. So we can't go with that.

[@river1403]

I’m canadian, but I think there will be a no-confidence vote against Johnson. He HAS to go. He’s no good for you guys.

[@river1403]

I will gladly send you Trudeau in stead of Johnson lol

[@video99couk]

That would play into B.J's hands because he can then try to get a situation where no-deal Brexit happens in the middle of a GE. So he won't be given the chance to go until after he's requested the delay or got a deal through Parliament (little chance of the latter).

[@jmas1219]

Not yet. The way it works in a no confidence vote is 2 weeks 'cooling off' period during which Boris has even MORE power. Plus there's no available replacement 'caretaker' PM who is acceptable to parliament. Jeremy Corbyn, the top contender, is too far to the extreme left in his political views and no one trusts him either. The priority at the moment is to get past Oct 31 without crashing out of the EU. As soon as that deadline is safely behind us there will be a General Election but that still won't solve anything. It is impossible to predict who will get the top spot but the chances of an election returning a majority government aren't good. The UK is well and truly stuck between a rock and a hard place politically. An extreme hard right Tory party, extreme hard left Labour party, and the biggest of the minor parties, Lib Dem and Brexit party are also hard right wingers. The majority of voters are of moderate inclination, left or right, and there's no one in politics atm who reflects that view. The fat lady has not yet sung on this mess and is not likely to any time soon.

[@davianthule2035]

Chuck literally by definition the same thing, the definition of a Canadian is literally someone who has Canadian citizenship

[@davianthule2035]

Chuck I guess most Canadians are not Canadians then, fucking nativists.

[@mrnice4434]

Bercow without his fancy robe looks strange. :)

[@mofa9745]

Mr Nice - surely he just looks strange anyway, doesn't he ?

[@Mondfischli]

..he lost some weight 🤔

[@phylliida]

Wearing a classy tie though

[@jordanreeseyre]

Correction: The ruling read that the prorogation had the effect of preventing parliament scrutinising the government. The ruling did not make a judgment on the motivation of the prorogation even if such motivation is self evident.

[@jesuszamora6949]

Six of one, half dozen of the other...

[@imjstar]

The ruling also mentioned the lack of evidence for the necessity of a prorogation; which does hint on the motivation of the government.

[@xthor86]

@@imjstar parlament has sat for 3 years and done Nothing. There has never in history been a better reason to prorouge it

[@ORO323]

Yep, wish the SC in America wasn't heavily politicized as well. Too much bias and favoritism.

[@filipem.aguiar3119]

What I like about u guys, is how honest and open u talk about your work. This transparency is what I like and respect, therefore your channel is one of my first go to for today's news Outstanding work

[@donalcoleman8793]

Elderly ladies are baller, the judge that gave the ruling basically slapped Boris in the face by just wearing a broach

[@19Musicismylife96]

You thought it was the finale but TWIST!

[@areamusicale]

After so many years of all this Brexit situation I still do not understand why GB wants to leave Europe ... and I can't find an answer anywhere. Can anybody help me?

[@aaronjacobs3980]

Because everyone in my country who supports leave are racist, xenophobic idiots who still believe that the empire exists (as you can tell, I'm a remainer)

[@paulallen579]

Poor lad, we have this big thing happening in the UK and the impeachment inquiry in the US on the same day. And he's in Italy. God bless him.

[@koboldprime2257]

That is some SPICY final season *or is it?*

[@jmas1219]

Not even CLOSE to the final season yet.

[@mistermelorious]

Yeah but it's going to turn into one of those series that should finish at season 3 but gets offered too much money so continues for about nine seasons.

[@StYxXx]

The Spider Queen has spoken!

[@michaelmeyer-palmer3659]

Bercow, my man.

[@murdelabop]

Well done, guys. Stepping up and producing shows like this one when your primary presenter is away is part of what being a team is all about. The show must go on. Well done.

[@marsupius]

Going on vacation while there is drama at work.... Very European of you, Tom. I wish we Americans could do that kind of thing

[@tserica]

It's actually not true that the ruling said that his reasoning for the prorougue was illegal. The court found that it was illegal if it had the effect of impeding Parliament, regardless of intent.

[@czarzenana5125]

It was unlawful, not illegal.

[@imjstar]

Actually, they ruled that reasoning behind the prorogue were not justified. The ruling was as follows: " The effect of frustrating or preventing, WITHOUT REASONABLE JUSTIFICATION, the power of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions." The prorogue was also ruled unlawful as opposed to illegal, as there is no direct law against it.

[@czarzenana5125]

@@imjstar Exactly. Boris might even have had reasonable justification, but it wasn't presented to the court when asked for.

[@joshpike1431]

This was very helpful, please keep uploading daily (even if it's a Podcast) because you are my main source of news!

[@livefromhollywood194]

Good choice doing this format. Perfect for days like today. One of the main thing I value about your channel is how quick the videos come out, even with the info being extremely detailed.

[@Igneusflama]

I appreciate the transparency with the podcast thing. Can't wait to have you back.

[@benheideveld4617]

Johnson did NOT say he VERY much respect the verdict. He said the verdict would be respected. But he ALSO said the verdict was WRONG. Unheard of, no respect for separation of powers.

[@bsompie]

You can still disagree and still respect the rulings. However, it's a different story when someone said they would respect the will of the people 3 years ago and the people STILL have not received what they voted for after 3 years.

[@davianthule2035]

Brandon a functional 50/50 split in a vote shrouded in deception and lies isn’t exactly a legitimate call of “will of the people”, I will remind you that the tories lost seats while running an election on leaving with a hard brexit....THEY LOST SEATS.

[@freddrake6911]

@@bsompie But the majority of the country dont want brexit anymore so surely the will of the people would be now to remain or have a second referendum at the very least.

[@naphackDT]

@@freddrake6911 In the last general election, roughly 80% of the British people voted for parties that had leaving the EU in their manifesto. How much more of a democratic mandate to leave the EU do you want?

[@ott1186]

@@freddrake6911 'but the majority of the country don't want brexit anymore' what are you basing that on? Seems the opposite is true.

[@Xaintrix]

The podcast misses the mark for me. For something that touts itself, branded, as TL;DR why isn’t it more focused? Digestible? I gave it a few tries, but it’s just not for me.

[@christopherknight7813]

This ruling is interesting when you think about how parliament should function as a bottom up system going from the power of the people; parliament and then put into law, this is now backwards as it is a ruling of law that is imposed on parliament and will then effect the people, this I think is the current disastrous distopian future of our political system and they aren't even trying to pretend that parliament is for the people, I can't remember who said it but after this ruling the MP basically said that this is the separation and sovereignty of parliament! Which is via the rule of law of unelected lawmakers who will be able to now tell parliament what it needs to tell the people to do, Brexit aside this is scary stuff and far too few people have realised what's happening, although non of it is hidden it is cleverly compartmentalized and spread out. (The supreme court is a new thing 2009 and doesn't have the kinds of limits that tried and tested courts have), I think maybe the Brexit issue forced these people to let their masks slip, they have to act for some reason and in some way being part of the EU must be important for this top down system of rule to work.

[@Ganty]

very high speed video release

[@keithcross2102]

the judgement of the court is available online and is the best source. The reasons relate to the effect of prorogation not any intent as no conclusions were made about that. You will be able to enjoy a tour through legal history, from case of proclamations 1610, general warrants and R vs de keyser hotels to R vs Burmah oil. They could have thrown in a few more... but as it was put in 1610 "the king hath no prerogative save what the law of the land allows him." Court King's Bench Decided Michaelmas Term, 1610 Citation(s) [1610] EWHC KB J22 EWHC KB J22 77 ER 1352 12 Co Rep 74

[@keithcross2102]

the Lords appointed the two Chief Justices, Chief Baron, and Baron Altham, to have consideration of it. Note, the King by his proclamation of other ways cannot change any part of the common law, or statute law, or the customs of the realm, 11 Hen. 4. 37. Fortescue De Laudibus Angliae Legum, cap. 9.18 Edw. 5. 35, 36, etc. 31 Hen. 8. cap. 8. hic infra: also the King cannot create any offence by his prohibition or proclamation, which was not an offence before, for that was to change the law, and to make an offence which was not; for ubi non est lex, ibi non est transgression: ergo, that which cannot be punished without proclamation, cannot be punished with it. Vide le stat. 31 Hen. 8. cap. 8.[1] which Act gives more power to the King than he had before, and yet there it is declared that proclamations shall not alter the law, statutes, or customs of the realm, or impeach any in his inheritance, goods, body, life, etc. But if a man shall be indicted for a contempt against a proclamation, he shall be fined and imprisoned, and so impeached in his body and goods. Vide Fortescue, cap. 9. 18. 34. 36, 37 etc.

[@edwardgrabczewski]

Boris Johnson has no excuse for proroging Parliament again because he's already had a week to work on the Queen's speech!

[@jmas1219]

Bojo doesn't write the Queen's speech you putz. Irrelevant anyway as the prorogation 'never happened'. No speech needed.

[@gentlemanvontweed7147]

@@edwardgrabczewski Prorogation is the only remaining way to prevent the traitors in parliament from stopping democracy. The people voted leave and leave we will.

[@edwardgrabczewski]

@Barnaby Joe Wigglesabit Perpahs she's a closet remainer

[@edwardgrabczewski]

@@gentlemanvontweed7147 Which "traitors" are we talking about? Those who want another democratic confirmatory referrendum or those who tried to silence Parliament?

[@edwardgrabczewski]

@Barnaby Joe Wigglesabit I'm aware that she was initially a remainer but, like Boris Johnson, changed her mind and fought hard for Brexit agreement. Do date she is the only one who has successfully managed to find an acceptable agreement with the EU. Chances are that if Boris Johnson finds any agreement with the EU then it will be heavily based on her work. Teresa May is no more a liar than Boris Johnson in my opinion. And she is infinitely more honourable, as is Jeremy Corbyn.

[@TheDarkKnight992]

Thanks for video guys. We ppreciate you guys stepping in.

[@PabloRios]

If you are using podcast film the podcast so we can see the people. It is easier for us to watch and easier for you with no graphics needed, less editing. Take play from PhilDefranco and even Logan Paul. Their podcast is also good to look at. I actually like the podcast it is just that the mind automatically sends warnings when one listens to a conversation and can not see who is talking... it becomes tiring ... hope you heard the advice and use it to double your output.

[@russiandrivers9986]

They could say the if he had an honour he should resign but he'd just reply that he doesn't have any honour.

[@carloc8763]

Thank you guys for the effort, well done. Truly appreciated.

[@bartiix0]

Such short, on topic, animated podcasts are really well done and nice to watch. Don't give up this idea!

[@nimb321]

Brexiteers: We don't want immigrants! They're all illegal! You have to respect the rule of law! Brexit-Prime-Minister: breaks the law Brexiteers: *except* if...

[@czarzenana5125]

Supreme Court didn't rule Boris broke the law. What he did was unlawful, not illegal.

[@ott1186]

Lol average leaver logic and fact checking on full display here.

[@czarzenana5125]

@@ott1186 I am advocating remain, but that doesn't mean I have to lie like leavers do. So, your analysis is wrong to begin with. Not very smart Otis.

[@ott1186]

@@czarzenana5125 The average Leaver tries to use this argument. You don't appear to be the average leaver. Leavers lie but my analysis that remainers fail at logic is wrong? So basically 'I'm right, you're wrong'. Sorry there's not much I can respond to there.

[@SolarMechanic]

I love that Lady Hale was ready for Arts & Crafts after the ruling. They got the cameras out because that desk was about to be covered in glitter-glue.

[@MrGonzonator]

Good effort lads.

[@hanspillow278]

john bercows tie is outstanding

[@alsmith20000]

So does this mean that we are still in the previous parliamentary session? and therefore it would not be possible to vote on May's deal again without substantial changes?

[@peterebel7899]

New schedule: - Prorogation for next week's Tory congress - Prorogation for queen's speech - vist of EU's Council mid of October - PM's resignation to avoid any duties out of Benn's act. Facing nice times in November. A little bit of chaos does help following the desired path.

[@tsbs7s]

CORRECTION: Unlawful does not mean illegal. Illegal means something is forbidden by law. Unlawful means something is not authorised by law because such law doesn't exist.

[@AnonEyeMouse]

666 views. Noteworthy. Evidently.

[@yes_head]

Good job you two, and thanks for filling in. Jack's thinking, "Bloody bad timing for a vacation, wot?!"

[@BigHenFor]

They did NOT adjudicate on the reason for the Prorogation but on its Effect on Parliamentary Sovereignty. The Supreme Court rules that the length of the porogation had the effect of unreasonably preventing Parliament fufilling its task of supervising The Government as part of its legitimate sovereignty. Their Lordships in the judgment contrasted the effect of prorogation to that Parliament going into recess on the ability of Parliament to supervise The Executive. When adjourned, neither House sits in session but, the select committees continue and written questions can be submitted to ministers that must be answered, so the government can be held to account as the Parliament session continues. Prorogation shuts all activity in Parliament, and no select committees sit, and no questions can be submitted to ministers as the parliamentary session is ended. So, the Government is effectively unsupervised during a Prorogation. It has been the norm that when a Queen's Speech is to be delivered at the opening of the new parliamentary session, the prorogation is at most 4 working days. Their Lordships concluded then that in proroguing Parliament for 5 weeks, the Government had unreasonably removed Parliament's ability to supervise for that extended period, and voided the Prorogation. In the judgment available to download from the The Supreme Court's website, it was made clear that it could not adjudicate on the reasons for the prorogation but, it could adjudicate on its effect. Guys, its one of the most well-written judgments I've had the opportunity to read, and I think their Lordships strove to emphasise that they were not entitled to adjudicate on the reasons for it, as these were political. Only Parliament is entitled to do that. And the case law and constitutional authorities backed them up.

[@areamusicale]

"Britain wants to leave Europe because" PLEASE, FINISH THIS SENTENCE

[@daikucoffee5316]

Can you name a worse prime minister in UKs history?

[@MrGeorocks]

Cameron, for starting this mess.

[@bruceh9780]

I would love to be listening in on what May is saying right now :p

[@bosoerjadi2838]

It is a well-beloved British hobby to always have the current PM top the updated list of the worst PMs in history.

[@daikucoffee5316]

@@tomg7913 Ok, you have a point.

[@snakeatwar]

"You're not going to have some judges seen as brexit judges and some seen as remainer judges." LOL Just look at the comments on the BBC, Telegraph, and Guardian news videos. Apparently they are ALL remain judges. LOL Some people are just delusional.

[@BoojumFed]

I think the unspoken addendum was "...by relatively sane people." Unfortunately, not many of those remain in the Leave camp.

[@snakeatwar]

@@BoojumFed I wouldn't say so much about the Leave camp, but definitely about the No Deal camp.

[@daveskelly]

I have a question - if the PM has been found to have performed an illegal act, why is he not being arrested and brought up in front of the criminal courts?

[@PGraveDigger1]

Members of the house of commons are immune from prosecution for anything illegal they do regarding civil law, as long as they do it within the actual building.

[@daveskelly]

@@PGraveDigger1 Thanks for replying. Assuming by 'actual building' you mean the houses of Parliament. I agree that Lords and MPs are immune within the house. However, I understood that the SC stated that the act of advising HM the Queen was unlawful, therefore outside of Parliament(?). So is Balmoral assumed to be part of the Parliament buildings? - I really don't know the answer

[@freddrake6911]

Also its not actually illegal its unlawful they are slightly different meaning he cant be prosecuted for it, it just becomes void and acts as if it never happened.

[@PGraveDigger1]

@@daveskelly "However, I understood that the SC stated that the act of advising HM the Queen was unlawful" This is true. However, an act being unlawful doesn't make it illegal. As far as I know you cannot be prosecuted for unlawful acts, only for illegal acts. So in this case, Johnson cannot be prosecuted.

[@jmas1219]

It might still happen but that is out of the Supreme Court's control. It would be yet another historic landmark for Bojo though - the first PM to leave Downing St in handcuffs. Nice thought.

[@verenal.1477]

Thank you for keeping us updated. I'm not a big podcast listener but I really appreciate the effort you guys put into all your work. Thank you for keeping us up to date and making it easier for us than reading tons of newspaper articles. Well done!

[@christopherg2347]

Checking "Justiceability" is basically checking "are we even responsible for this? Or is there another (lower) court more responsible for ruling on this?" It is something every Court does. While most cases are covered by practice - you know not to run a murder case through small claims court - it is still something that is done.

[@griffincheng]

if johnson resigns, the new season ends too soon. the writers must be thinking about doing trump drama and rush everything! money back!

[@regenermoonshinebms6632]

I wouldn't mind seeing these mini videos again. What bothered me about some of the previous podcast videos were the extended clips without any animation.

[@horizonkage]

Who are they and what do they stand to gain? What's the history of this court? Where's the money?

[@czarzenana5125]

Questions for PMQs need to be handed in 3 days upfront. Therefor no PMQs today.

[@sgtspite]

A precedent has now been set, any political decision can be overturned if you don't like it. We are effectively ruled by unelected judges. (Huge!)

[@jasonackerman9453]

I wouldn't mind this being a regular thing until Jack returns. Lower budget TLDR updates are better than no TLDR updates

[@tommonk7651]

“Justiciable”. Just sayin’.

[@Calum_S]

Parliament will probably now agree to go into recess for the rest of the conference season.

[@kennystoneman2584]

Thank you, Zac & Ben! This was a helpful summary of the situation.

[@Frosty-oj6hw]

They're not "following the law", they're creating law as this was a precedent setting case. The ruling was that his actions were unlawful but only through setting that precedent, which means at the time he made the decision to prorogue it wasn't explicitly unlawful to do so. Which makes me really question the accusations that he "broke the law", typically when new laws are created you cannot back date them. So if you do something that's lawful today and a new law is brought in that would have made that action illegal, you can't be prosecuted, because it was legal at the time.

[@matthewwypyszinski4873]

It's hardly fair to question the impartiality of the US supreme court. They have remained very much impartial over the years, regardless of what the media would have you believe.

[@sirdeadlock]

Thanks for the update.

[@needmorecowbell6895]

What exactly are the powers of the PM if he doesn't have a majority, can't disolve the government and force an election, can't pass legislation, and can't prorogue parliment? The executive branch is just dead or a hostage until the fixed term parliment ends or until the parliment or the courts decide government needs to function?

[@JohnSmith-nz4bn]

What about the scheduled break? Would that not occur unless otherwise voted against by the MPs?

[@b3108]

Hearing some strange things in your podcast: not all f-words were beeped out. Call me fussy, but please either beep them all out or don’t at all. But don’t beep some out and not beep out the rest.

[@hallowacko]

Totally understand why you had to do this :) JESUS, the news does NOT respect personal time much though. WOW. What a time to get that ruling!

[@Tomartyr]

Seems odd that remainers are having an outcry over Boris disagreeing with the Supreme Court. So we can question and nullify the Monarch's Royal Prerogative but not question the ruling of judges who derive their authority from that Prerogative?