All dogs are cats and black is white

[JonathanM]

Why don't you read some of the ruling and understand the basis that the Supreme Court ruled the policy unlawful. To be clear I do not support the Rwanda plan, but that doesn't mean I accept all the BS that is being said about it.

What about this statement from a Tory peer, Lord Tugendhat, today in Committee. Does anything about this proposed new law make you at all worried (in a legal sense)? It's a long time since I had to think about things like the separation of powers and parliamentary sovereignty, so it's difficult for me to judge the competing rhetoric.

“I have been a member of Parliament for a very long time on and off, and I have been a member of the Conservative party for some 66 years when I counted it up, and I do have to say that I find it quite extraordinary that the party of Margaret Thatcher should be introducing a Bill of this kind,” Lord Tugendhat said.

Lord Tugendhat added: “What we are being asked to do really represents the sort of behaviour that the world associates with despots and autocracies, not with an established democracy, not with the Mother of Parliaments. It is a bill we should not even be asked to confront, let alone pass.”

I've now been reading this article, which sets out one point of view:

https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/conta...fact-confirmed-by-the-highest-court-in-the-uk

“The bill creates a statutory obligation that every decision maker, including the courts, must treat Rwanda as a safe country,” said Law Society chief executive Ian Jeffery.

“In doing so, it is seeking to avoid an evidence-based finding of fact confirmed by the Supreme Court, the highest court in the United Kingdom.

“This is damaging to both the rule of law and the constitutional separation of powers. While parliament has the right to respond to a court judgment by passing legislation to change a point of domestic law, it cannot use law to change fact.

“Independent judicial oversight is a bedrock of the rule of law and essential to ensuring there are democratic safeguards for individual rights. The measures taken in this bill would effectively place government above the law and demonstrate a profound lack of respect for the rule of law and separation of powers.”