Premium
Mixed Messages in Bottles: the European Union, Devolution, and the Future of the Constitution
Author(s) -
Murkens Jo Eric Khushal
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
the modern law review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.37
H-Index - 22
eISSN - 1468-2230
pISSN - 0026-7961
DOI - 10.1111/1468-2230.12279
Subject(s) - prerogative , devolution (biology) , constitution , parliament , political science , law , european union , member state , legislature , argument (complex analysis) , verdict , supreme court , government (linguistics) , state (computer science) , sociology , member states , economics , philosophy , biochemistry , chemistry , linguistics , politics , anthropology , economic policy , human evolution , algorithm , computer science
An unprecedented eleven‐member UK Supreme Court decided R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union on 24 January 2017. The Government's argument, that it could start the process of withdrawing from the EU using a prerogative power instead of an Act of Parliament, was comprehensively defeated by an 8:3 majority. However, the Government also secured a unanimous verdict that it did not need the consent from the devolved legislatures in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland before invoking Article 50 of the TEU. I explore the judicial argumentation in light of Philip Bobbitt's six modalities of constitutional argument, five of which feature, and one of which ought to have featured, in this seminal case.