Outrage from whom? Can't be Cherry - she's permanently outraged.

Let's hope the Supreme Court overrules this.

Ms Cherie Amour feeling suitably smug she's kicked off a battle royal between the Scottish and English Courts. She has always maintained there's more than one way to break up Britain.

I still can't believe she is a real QC after all the drivel she talks... she is showing her anti-Englishness by stirring up this pot.

I have my own definition as to what QC means in her case.

She is on a personal vendetta and as such should not be in politics.

"Outraged" - they'll be "demanding" next.

Outrageous was the SNP's questioning the integrity and the authority of the Supreme Court and its Scottish judges:-

'Alex Salmond provokes fury with attack on UK supreme court

Alex Salmond has provoked a furious row with senior legal figures after launching a series of attacks on the authority of the UK supreme court and the competence of its two Scottish judges.

The first minister and his justice secretary, Kenny MacAskill, accused the court of "intervening aggressively" in Scotland's independent legal system after it ruled that the Scottish system had twice breached the European convention on human rights in significant criminal cases.

The Scottish cabinet decided on Monday to set up an expert legal group to urgently consider how Salmond's government can block the supreme court from its oversight of criminal cases.

At the same time, it emerged that MacAskill wants to stop paying Scotland's £478,000 annual share of the court's running costs. Earlier this week, he said most supreme court judges' only knowledge of Scotland was through attending the Edinburgh festival.'

https://www.theguardian.com...

Given the amount of illegal shennigans at the HoC over the last few weeks, the government are right to ignore this latest farce.

"First Minister Nicola Sturgeon posted on social media that the comments were “pitiful, pathetic and desperate”.

I have corrected the typo, Below is what it should read;-

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon posted on social media that her comments were “pitiful, pathetic and desperate”.

Well corrected, now I understand!

All this because Cherry did not like the result of a feferendum. You lost dear, get over it and grow up.

This will be reason 24 for Nippy to declare Freedumb. The fact is no Scottish court has jurisdiction over Westminster.

Erm, it is a UK Court and right now it does

even if that were true... would that just be another tremendous reason for independence?

this decision is not final so do not think that brexit is dead. lawyers will conclude this in the Supreme Court the remainders will not accept it. only the people having a GE and showing parliament we rule the country not a few dissenters with a axes to grind

Some people getting awfully worked up about "an anonymous Downing Street source ... quoted by a (the) Sun". I wonder why?

You are quite right .....
After all, the ubiquitous 'Spokesman for the Scottish Government' spouts plenty of twaddle in response to opposition and journalistic questions, on these very pages.

This is becoming a total farce now. I, like many others now just want out. I was a remainer but now after seeing the deplorable behaviour of these people virtually preventing Boris Johnstone's bargaining position with the EU is just awful. For three years now this has been going on and people just want it done. I do not know how well how Boris would do but at least he has got things moving, but all those shouting the odds do not seem to offer any solution. Sturgeon and the SNP just doing their usual, shouting garbage from the side lines like badly behaved parents at a school football match.

Good evening from England, my Scottish cousins.

It was wrong for Downing Street sources to suggest bias, and the Scottish legal system has a long, proud history, but of course there is always room for suspicion about such legal decisions, and we have appeal and supreme courts for a reason. Judges do get it wrong and do overstep the mark, as the Court of Session has, in a sense, concluded about the last judge's decision, in which he found in favour of the government.

Further, if issues such as prorogation are barely justiciable (as the previous judge said) and are political issues, and if such constitutional issues are rarely brought before the courts, then there is more latitude for judges to make new judgements, free from the constraints of precedence.

In this sense, it is perfectly possible for forms of bias to creep in to judgements. This may not be a bias against Tories or Brexit, but, in a sense, a bias towards seeing political and constitutional matters as more justiciable than the English courts or ordinary people would see them.

Clearly, there are key differences between English and Scottish legal judgements, with English courts less likely to see prorogation as justiciable, though do note that the previous Scottish judge also concluded that it was a political matter alone.

The Supreme Court will attempt to harmonise these very different viewpoints.

The other problem here, I think, is that even where the Government knew all the benefits of prorogation, this doesn't mean that the decision was not, in the end, a multi-factorial one. I suspect that freeing up government bandwidth by proroguing parliament was a key benefit, but the government also felt the urge to close the long 2-year session and to officially draw a line in the sand between it and the previous premiership, putting a new legislative timetable in place.

My own, untutored, view, is simply that the government can, within reasonable bounds, decide when too prorogue. It is not especially egregious to close a 2-year parliamentary session, to end 3 years' of hard debate on Brexit, to win back some bandwidth by preventing further constitutional shenanigans courtesy of the Opposition, and to set up a stall ahead of a new agenda and possible General Election. This is up to the Government as, we must remember, the executive.

It is not as if it was calling for a five-month prorogation just a few months into a session, and it anyway coincided with a likely recess of parliament ahead of the party conference season. We must maintain some sense of proportion in otherwise mad times.

My support continues unabashed to all my fellow Unionists.

Only the bold or ignorant will egregiously be in contempt of a court. Sadly, Sturgeon could not resist her urge to respond and exhausted her vocabulary.

She and Cherry, maybe lawyers but both are political pygmies in the big political world. Cherry on TV tonight lwas ike a wee girl who had just got a prize for skipping.

Oh for God's sake....exactly which law has been broken! This loopy decision will be chucked out next week when proper judges look at It!

These 3 judges should have had a look at the Edinburgh Agreement signed by Salmond and Sturgeon and see what opinion they came up with as to being legal and final and bound by law.

Surely no one could suggest that anyone has been "Murmuring the Judges ".

MATT cartoon: One No.10 adviser to another:-

"Here's the plan: if Boris is in jail he CAN'T go to Brussels to ask for an extension."

Haha. Nice one.

After reading the judgement, Dominic Grieve, Conservative MP, and former Attorney General for England and Wales, fully agrees with the ruling made by the panel of three Scots Law Lords.

He would say that, wouldn't he.

So, the Scots Law Lords are less impartial than the Law Lords ruling on the Law of England and Wales?

This "anonymous Downing Street source" must think Scotland is a foreign country?

Has it got your hackles up Hoggi?.

I thought YOU think of it as a foreign country.

"must think Scotland is a foreign country"

When it comes to the judicial system, you are correct.