Boris Johnson won’t rule out RESIGNING if he loses Brexit court case

Boris Johnson refuses to rule out shutting down Parliament AGAIN or RESIGNING if he loses the Supreme Court Brexit case as judges confirm they will reveals whether his decision to prorogue the Commons was legal or not TOMORROW

  • The Supreme Court will hand down landmark judgement at 10.30am on Tuesday
  • Justices will decide whether Boris Johnson gave unlawful advice to the Queen
  • Mr Johnson is due to be in New York meeting president Trump tomorrow 

Boris Johnson today repeatedly refused to rule out shutting down Parliament again – or resigning – if the Supreme Court rules that his five-week pre-Brexit prorogation was illegal.

Judges have revealed they will hand down their landmark judgement on the Prime Minister’s highly contentious manoeuvre at 10.30am tomorrow on what will b a highly charged day for Britain. 

But speaking on  trip to the United States the Prime Minister twice declined ruling out suspending Parliament for a second time.

He said: ‘Yes this an issue that has split my party, it split the country, it’s a very divisive issue. 

‘My strong view is the best way, the only way forward now is to do what the people mandated us to do and come out of the EU on October 31.’

The PM also twice declined to rule out resignation if the Supreme Court finds against the Government, saying: ‘I’m going to wait and see what the judgment is.’ 

Mr Johnson is currently in New York (pictured) where he is to meet US President Donald Trump on Tuesday for talks at the United Nations General Assembly

Remain campaigner Gina Miller, who brought one of the cases against the Government, arriving at the Supreme Court in London

The 11 justices will deliver their verdict on a series of cases questioning the Government’s motives for the shutdown.

The panel of judges in the highest court in the UK have been asked to rule on whether the Prime Minister’s advice to the Queen to prorogue Parliament until October 14 was unlawful. 

Mr Johnson is currently in New York where he is to meet US President Donald Trump tomorrow for talks at the United Nations General Assembly, as well as key EU leaders. 

 The Supreme Court judges, led by the court’s president Lady Hale, heard appeals over three days from September 17 arising out of legal challenges in England and Scotland – which produced different outcomes.

At the High Court in London, the Lord Chief Justice Lord Burnett and two other judges rejected a challenge against the Prime Minister’s prorogation move by campaigner and businesswoman Gina Miller.

But in Scotland, a cross-party group of MPs and peers won a ruling from the Inner House of the Court of Session that Mr Johnson’s prorogation decision was unlawful because it was ‘motivated by the improper purpose of stymieing Parliament’.

Mrs Miller’s barrister Lord Pannick QC, told the Supreme Court that Mr Johnson’s motive for an ‘exceptionally long’ prorogation was to ‘silence’ Parliament, and that his decision was an ‘unlawful abuse of power’.

But, Sir James Eadie QC argued on the Prime Minister’s behalf that the suggestion the prorogation was intended to ‘stymie’ Parliament ahead of Brexit was ‘untenable’.

The Prime Minister advised the Queen on August 28 to prorogue Parliament for five weeks and it was suspended on September 9.

Mr Johnson claimed the five-week suspension was to allow the Government to set out a new legislative agenda in a Queen’s Speech when MPs return to Parliament on October 14.

But those who brought the legal challenges argued the prorogation was designed to prevent parliamentary scrutiny of the UK’s impending exit from the EU on October 31.

At the close of the unprecedented proceedings, Lady Hale said: ‘I must repeat that this case is not about when and on what terms the United Kingdom leaves the European Union.

‘The result of this case will not determine that.

‘We are solely concerned with the lawfulness of the Prime Minister’s decision to advise Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament on the dates in question.’

Source: Read Full Article