Johnson Accused of Committing a Crime in the Future

-edited

The High Court of Scotland agreed to hear a case in which a person is alleged to commit a crime on a future date.

Imaginary Setup

  1. Suppose you are accused that on October 19, two weeks in the future, that you will break the law.
  2. You deny you will break the law.
  3. Someone files a lawsuit against you, asserting that you will indeed break the law.
  4. The high court of the nation agree to hear the case

The setup is not imaginary. It happened today. The case involves whether or not UK prime minister Boris Johnson will break the Benn Law requiring him to ask the EU for a Brexit extension.

Lawsuit Filed

The Guardian Live Blog fills in details.

As legal proceedings get back under way in Scotland, Maugham, one of those bringing the court of session legal action, has made further remarks to PA Media. "It’s impossible for him [Johnson] to say, as he’s been telling parliament and indeed the rest of us, that we will leave the EU on October 31, come what may. That is no longer a true statement, if ever it was a true statement, of the law and the prime minister acknowledges it."

On those grounds a lawsuit was filed and the case will be heard despite the fact "the UK government promised the highest civil court in Scotland that Boris Johnson would send a letter to the EU seeking an extension to article 50 as required by the Benn act."

Meanwhile, Leo Varadkar, the Irish premier, said that if Boris Johnson submitted a request for an extension he would agree.

Steve Baker Explains

This is certainly amusing because it seems impossibly contradictory.

However I offer this piece of advice.

Helpful Advice

If someone bets you the queen of hearts will jump out of the pack and spit grapefruit juice in your eye, and you take the bet, most likely you will get an eyeful of grapefruit juice.

Even if this is some sort of Johnson bluff, filing a lawsuit against someone before any crime is committed is totally absurd.

It also shows just how far Remainers will go to stop an action that was legally voted on.

The case should be thrown out with malice and a fine if possible.

Meanwhile, I stick with my assessment: The UK is On the Verge of a Brexit Breakthrough.

To that I add, Remainers are now scared shitless.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock

Comments (49)
No. 1-11
Mish
Mish

Editor

""My Lord, please find a darker font that can be read with ease. Thanks!"

Comments anyone

avidremainer
avidremainer

Mish, No one is scared shitless. Most brexiteers seem to have buried their moral compass and can't remember where it is. You may remember in one of your posts about the resignation of Mrs May and her possible successors I said that I hoped it was Boris. I did that for a reason. It has rolled out how I hoped. The people who are worried are the brexiteers, they fear that they've got the wrong person in charge, and they are right to fear this. By electing the liar the Tories made themselves the party of no deal brexit. There is no way that the liar's proposals to the EU were a sincere attempt to get a deal. Our Prime Minister has just received an almighty thump in the guts. No 10 announced that he was going on a whistle stop tour to Berlin and Paris. Berlin and Paris announced that no one was going to talk to our PM because of scheduling difficulties. Diplomatic speak for Fck off. Now I think this shows where the power is and it is not in the UK. It is as stark as that. I think like you do that a no deal exit is still more likely than not, not because the liar will take us out but because the EU will say "We've had enough, fck off." I think the pressure is on the Libdems to drop their objection to Corbyn and for the ex Tories to agree to vote for Corbyn in a VONC. It is either Corbyn or no deal because no deal is what will happen if the liar stays in place.

Stuki
Stuki

When "Rule of Law" is reduced to simple Newspeak for "Rule of entirely arbitrary law and even more arbitrary interpretation," then why not? We're talking about an outpost of the post civilized, insult-to-history West here, after all.

2banana
2banana

We had an election...but the liberals/progressives didn't like the results.

So it is destruction of all social and government institutions to overturn that vote.

Am I talking US or UK?

stillCJ
stillCJ

Editor

I used to respect the people of Scotland (especially after watching "Braveheart"). I can no longer respect them and it would seem Britain would be better off to grant them their desire to be cut loose from the United Kingdom.

JustASimpleMan
JustASimpleMan

For the first time ever I disagree with Mish but agree with Avidremainer.

Remainers are definitely not scared shitless. They are deluded shitless. They believe that having got the Benn act passed and ticked off, they can control the whole situation by constant reference to the courts and by tying up the government with ever more soggy bits of moth-eaten string.

Meanwhile, off camera the real plan is rolling along nicely. By the 19th it will all be irrevocable. Varadker will have to start erecting a border at the insistence of the EU, having overplayed his hand.

Remainers have only two options - one is to capitulate, the other is to put wily old Jeremy and his team of incompetents into number 10. Even his own MPs don't want that.

I look forward to seein Avid's ranting, illogical, fact-sparse post once the deed is done. His head will explode.

.

krage
krage

My theory is that the letter surely will be sent... But this will be followed by some public /official statement of certain content which will make it invalid... and why - it was discussed here for some time... now, EU will be desperate to prevent Brexit, so it will be colluding with remainers, so it all goes crazy in the last week of October - EU will be accepting letter which will be contradicting UK officials, so we can end up with UK saying on Nov 1 that Brexit has happen and EU opposing this point of view... This is what is coming... messy days... what would matter is UK acting as if it is outside of EU from Nov 1, that means EU will not have any real mechanisms to change it unless use some force ... so Brexit would happen defacto even without EU admitting it, but the implications for EU will be the same... why EU is not afraid of it? it puzzles me... they should accept Johnson's deal until it is too late...

Quatloo
Quatloo

The Remainer argument: The PM is guilty of the Pre-Crime of being likely not to comply with the law at some future date, despite his insistence that he will comply. Their only evidence? The word of the man they call the liar. They believe him when he says he won’t ask for an extension, but when he says he will comply with the law then he is a liar. They go to Scotland to file a lawsuit, because it is more heavily Remain. This really is desperation, they are terrified of Boris Johnson at this point, living in total fear that he has completely outsmarted them.

Six000mileyear
Six000mileyear

I re-read the highlights of the Benn Bill. The clause that got my attention the most was the EU can counter the 3 month delay request with ANY length of time they wish, and the PM would not be able to negotiate. The Benn bill usurps the powers of the executive branch, as well as gives the EU power over the UK without approval of ALL branches of the UK and the Queen. That sounds like treason to me.

Given the above scenario, PM Johnson correctly advised the Queen before placing Parliament on an extended recess. The courts missed their opportunity to protect sovereignty.

I think PM Johnson has the confidence to challenge the Benn bill. There may be a precedence in British Constitutional law that suspends a bill being challenged in the courts. Even so, that won't stop the EU's clock from ticking.

Mish
Mish

Editor

What I am not sure of is whether after the fact he can challenge. It is now law. He could have challenged before. I believe he easily would have won.