Theme 1: For judicial neutrality of the Supreme Court
Number of different rules that Supreme Court justices have to follow to ensure they remain neutral when exercising the law included in 2005 constitutional reform act
Judges act like civil servant - must be neutral and can't campaign
Judges must base each decision in law and provide full explanations
Robert reed is president of the Supreme Court - must be qualified lawyer for at least 15 years
Theme 1: Against judicial neutrality of the Supreme Court
Very narrow composition in terms of gender, age, education, class and race
Current 12 justices - 10 males , 11 are white , 11 have studied at oxbridge
The Times - Pale, male and stale
One female member was significant in Radmacher V Granatino
Males justices upheld the principle that cliaims made in the vent of a divorce should be limited
Counter - Still neutral as base every decision in law and simply implement the law
Theme 2: For judicial independence of Supreme Court
There were a lot of concerns about how independent the Supreme Court was, largely due to the fact that the law lords were within legislation
The house of lords is now chaired by the lord speaker and Supreme Court justices are now appointed by an independent
Ensures the Supreme Court operates with sufficient judicial independence
security of judicial independence through - judges can't be removed from office - they are limited to retirement age
independent budget to pay salaries which can't be manipulated - £225,000
Theme 2: Against judicial independence of Supreme Court
weakened due to increased media scrutiny of the judiciary
Article 50 case and prorogation case
no longer anonymous as they used to be as various parts of media and politicians, including ministers have commented on and criticised the courts
Supreme Court ruling on Rwanda was illegal under international law
Sunak critised the ruling in the media - " My patience is worn thin"
Puts undue pressure on the court, flouting sub juice rules and making it more difficult to act neutral
Theme 3 Against: Brexit
Important court cases like article 50
the daily mail - enemies of the people - defying democracy and the wishes of 17 million brexit voters
Arch retainers
influenced by anti - brexit views that were common among those with high levels of education
the cases are examples of Supreme Court seeking to interfere too much in politics and limit the actions of a democratically elected government
Theme 3 For: Brexit
Rather than Supreme Court seeking to interfere in political and stop the wishes of a democratically elected government, they were simply upholding the law against a government that was seeking to act ultra vires
Article 50 - there were right to require parliaments consent as triggering article 50
prorogation case - avoiding parliamentary scrutiny through using the power to prorogue for the government's benefit, upholding the sovereignty of parliament