-
Hmmmm.. the recent supreme court judgement on the advisory referendum rather suggests they are cretins.
It really doesn't - they always knew they were going to lose, but that wasn't the point.
For SNP MSPs to vote against their own legislation is a novel experience.
I don't think this has anything to do with the law, but it has everything to do with some of them being nasty transphobes.
I'm not a lawyer so I can't make any judgement on how well it was drafted. Are you?
Fox-
What was the point of the supreme court action in the opinion of your learned friends? I assume they're civil servants therefore subject to the civil service code. For a civil servant to propose ultra vires legislation seems iffy to say the least. The supreme court case cost the taxpayer £250k. I'm sure lessons will be learnt.
The GR bill is legislation so it has everything to do with the law. The possibility of this bill even being subject to a section 35 order rather suggests that it was badly drafted. Your learned friends have clearly fucked up again.
hurricane_run
Hmmmm.. the recent supreme court judgement on the advisory referendum rather suggests they are cretins. The Lord Advocate's submission was an embarrassment to the legal profession.
The Scottish GR legislation seems to me to have been badly drafted in a strictly legal sense in terms of the Scotland Act and the Equalities Act. For SNP MSPs to vote against their own legislation is a novel experience. The rush to get this bill through before Ms Forbes comes back from her maternity leave is telling.
Edit to add. this seems to me to be a reasonable summary legally..
https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2022/12/21/michael-foran-sex-gender-and-the-scotland-act/