Mark Elliott
@profmarkelliott.bsky.social
Professor of Public Law, University of Cambridge. Fellow, St Catharine's College, Cambridge. Blog: www.publiclawforeveryone.com. Website: www.markelliott.org
The High Court has held that the decision to proscribe Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act 2000 was unlawful. This post explains the court's reasoning and discusses some potential weaknesses in it (bearing in mind the government has said it will appeal).
publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/02/13/t...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/02/13/t...
The High Court’s judgment in the Palestine Action case
The High Court has ruled that the government’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act 2000 was unlawful, holding that the decision contravenes the government’s own policy on…
publiclawforeveryone.com
February 13, 2026 at 2:38 PM
The High Court has held that the decision to proscribe Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act 2000 was unlawful. This post explains the court's reasoning and discusses some potential weaknesses in it (bearing in mind the government has said it will appeal).
publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/02/13/t...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/02/13/t...
Thank you, George.
January 27, 2026 at 9:32 AM
Thank you, George.
"In Defence of Classical Administrative Law", by @philipmurraylaw and me, has now been published in the Cambridge Law Journal on FirstView. It is available via the following link (open access): doi.org/10.1017/S000...
December 16, 2025 at 11:49 AM
"In Defence of Classical Administrative Law", by @philipmurraylaw and me, has now been published in the Cambridge Law Journal on FirstView. It is available via the following link (open access): doi.org/10.1017/S000...
A reminder, following the conviction of Jimmy Lai, that two senior British lawyers—a former Law Lord and a former Supreme Court President—continue to lend respectability to the Hong Kong legal system by sitting as non-permanent judges on its highest court.
www.theguardian.com/world/2025/d...
www.theguardian.com/world/2025/d...
Jimmy Lai: conviction of Hong Kong pro-democracy figure decried as attack on press freedom
Rights groups dismiss ‘sham conviction’ of media tycoon on national security offences in city’s most closely watched rulings in decades
www.theguardian.com
December 15, 2025 at 11:50 AM
A reminder, following the conviction of Jimmy Lai, that two senior British lawyers—a former Law Lord and a former Supreme Court President—continue to lend respectability to the Hong Kong legal system by sitting as non-permanent judges on its highest court.
www.theguardian.com/world/2025/d...
www.theguardian.com/world/2025/d...
New post: Correcting the record on the ‘primacy’ of the House of Commons publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/12/15/c...
Correcting the record on the ‘primacy’ of the House of Commons
In an open letter written in the context of the passage of the Terminally Ill Adults Bill through Parliament, three former Cabinet Secretaries assert that respect for the ‘primacy’ of t…
publiclawforeveryone.com
December 15, 2025 at 11:33 AM
New post: Correcting the record on the ‘primacy’ of the House of Commons publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/12/15/c...
I'm grateful to the Sunday Times for publishing my letter on the constitutional role of the House of Lords, correcting the misleading impression created by an open letter signed by several former Cabinet Secretaries. www.thetimes.com/comment/lett...
December 15, 2025 at 10:51 AM
I'm grateful to the Sunday Times for publishing my letter on the constitutional role of the House of Lords, correcting the misleading impression created by an open letter signed by several former Cabinet Secretaries. www.thetimes.com/comment/lett...
Reposted by Mark Elliott
My speech of today to NIHRC now published in full by Joshua Rozenberg: “The ECHR - the view from London and Strasbourg”
December 8, 2025 at 2:39 PM
My speech of today to NIHRC now published in full by Joshua Rozenberg: “The ECHR - the view from London and Strasbourg”
Many thanks for reading, Anurag.
December 8, 2025 at 11:21 AM
Many thanks for reading, Anurag.
Reposted by Mark Elliott
The dialogue between Mark Elliott and Lord Sales here is fascinating. Ironically enough, in my thesis I conclude that parliamentary intent - at least as judicially conceptualised - rarely if ever makes it into drafting considerations. A point which courts perhaps need to consider.
Lord Sales devoted a recent lecture on the principle of legality to responding to my critique of one of his judgments. Here, I argue that our disagreement ultimately turns on sharply contrasting, and increasingly consequential, visions of the constitution
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/12/07/t...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/12/07/t...
Taking the constitution seriously: A response to Lord Sales
The incoming Deputy President of the Supreme Court devoted a recent lecture to a critique of my commentary on his judgment in the Spitalfields case, highlighting differences between us concerning t…
publiclawforeveryone.com
December 8, 2025 at 11:18 AM
The dialogue between Mark Elliott and Lord Sales here is fascinating. Ironically enough, in my thesis I conclude that parliamentary intent - at least as judicially conceptualised - rarely if ever makes it into drafting considerations. A point which courts perhaps need to consider.
Reposted by Mark Elliott
Lord Sales devoted a recent lecture on the principle of legality to responding to my critique of one of his judgments. Here, I argue that our disagreement ultimately turns on sharply contrasting, and increasingly consequential, visions of the constitution
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/12/07/t...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/12/07/t...
Taking the constitution seriously: A response to Lord Sales
The incoming Deputy President of the Supreme Court devoted a recent lecture to a critique of my commentary on his judgment in the Spitalfields case, highlighting differences between us concerning t…
publiclawforeveryone.com
December 7, 2025 at 4:19 PM
Lord Sales devoted a recent lecture on the principle of legality to responding to my critique of one of his judgments. Here, I argue that our disagreement ultimately turns on sharply contrasting, and increasingly consequential, visions of the constitution
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/12/07/t...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/12/07/t...
Lord Sales devoted a recent lecture on the principle of legality to responding to my critique of one of his judgments. Here, I argue that our disagreement ultimately turns on sharply contrasting, and increasingly consequential, visions of the constitution
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/12/07/t...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/12/07/t...
Taking the constitution seriously: A response to Lord Sales
The incoming Deputy President of the Supreme Court devoted a recent lecture to a critique of my commentary on his judgment in the Spitalfields case, highlighting differences between us concerning t…
publiclawforeveryone.com
December 7, 2025 at 4:19 PM
Lord Sales devoted a recent lecture on the principle of legality to responding to my critique of one of his judgments. Here, I argue that our disagreement ultimately turns on sharply contrasting, and increasingly consequential, visions of the constitution
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/12/07/t...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/12/07/t...
* Post 4 should say the existence of those *limits* (on the Lords' powers) proves the incorrectness of the claim in the letter.
December 7, 2025 at 10:44 AM
* Post 4 should say the existence of those *limits* (on the Lords' powers) proves the incorrectness of the claim in the letter.
The correct legal and constitutional position is set out here:
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/06/20/w...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/06/20/w...
Would it be constitutionally improper for the House of Lords to block the Assisted Dying Bill?
The Assisted Dying Bill has been approved by the House of Commons. But unless the Parliament Act is invokved, it also needs the approval of the House of Lords if it is to become law. What constitut…
publiclawforeveryone.com
December 7, 2025 at 10:37 AM
The correct legal and constitutional position is set out here:
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/06/20/w...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/06/20/w...
But there is no general principle that the Lords must always give way to the Commons. If there was, the more modest legal and conventional limits on the Lords' powers would be redundant. The existence of those powers proves the incorrectness of the claim in the letter. /4
December 7, 2025 at 10:37 AM
But there is no general principle that the Lords must always give way to the Commons. If there was, the more modest legal and conventional limits on the Lords' powers would be redundant. The existence of those powers proves the incorrectness of the claim in the letter. /4
The primacy of the Commons is constitutionally acknowledged in certain limited ways, including via the Salisbury convention (Lords should not block manifesto bills) and law (Parliament Acts enable Commons to legislate unilaterally subject to Lords' one-year delaying power). /3
December 7, 2025 at 10:37 AM
The primacy of the Commons is constitutionally acknowledged in certain limited ways, including via the Salisbury convention (Lords should not block manifesto bills) and law (Parliament Acts enable Commons to legislate unilaterally subject to Lords' one-year delaying power). /3
The letter asserts that: 'Respect for the primacy of the Commons is not optional; it is the foundation of our parliamentary legitimacy.' However, this statement is so partial as to be misleading and incorrect. /2
December 7, 2025 at 10:37 AM
The letter asserts that: 'Respect for the primacy of the Commons is not optional; it is the foundation of our parliamentary legitimacy.' However, this statement is so partial as to be misleading and incorrect. /2
This letter from former Cabinet Secretaries and others is straightforwardly wrong regarding the constitutional role of the House of Lords relative to the role of the Commons. /1
NEW: In a joint letter, senior peers including 3 former cabinet secretaries and 3 former Lords speakers have warned peers not to use procedural manoeuvres to thwart the assisted dying bill.
With 1,100+ amendments tabled, they warn the reputation of Parliament is on the line.
With 1,100+ amendments tabled, they warn the reputation of Parliament is on the line.
December 7, 2025 at 10:37 AM
This letter from former Cabinet Secretaries and others is straightforwardly wrong regarding the constitutional role of the House of Lords relative to the role of the Commons. /1
Simon Jenkins claims in the Guardian that it would be a 'democratic outrage' if the House of Lords were to block the Terminally Ill Adults Bill: www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...
That claim is constitutional nonsense, for the reasons I explain here: publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/06/20/w...
That claim is constitutional nonsense, for the reasons I explain here: publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/06/20/w...
Unelected Lords are blocking assisted dying – this is a democratic outrage | Simon Jenkins
Second chambers are a good idea, but they should not be able to overturn clear decisions reached by an elected body, says Guardian columnist Simon Jenkins
www.theguardian.com
November 20, 2025 at 10:02 PM
Simon Jenkins claims in the Guardian that it would be a 'democratic outrage' if the House of Lords were to block the Terminally Ill Adults Bill: www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...
That claim is constitutional nonsense, for the reasons I explain here: publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/06/20/w...
That claim is constitutional nonsense, for the reasons I explain here: publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/06/20/w...
New post: Tyranny, anarchy and the rule of law: Reflections on a major report by the Constitution Committee
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/11/20/t...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/11/20/t...
Tyranny, anarchy and the rule of law: Reflections on a major report by the Constitution Committee
The House of Lords Constitution Committee’s new report on the rule of law provides an excellent overview of the concept and of the many challenges it finds itself under in the UK today. But the rep…
publiclawforeveryone.com
November 20, 2025 at 11:17 AM
New post: Tyranny, anarchy and the rule of law: Reflections on a major report by the Constitution Committee
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/11/20/t...
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/11/20/t...
Now published in the Cambridge Law Journal (open access):
'Administrative Law Doctrine and Constitutional Principle in the Supreme Court'
My case note on the judgment in R (Spitalfields) v Tower Hamlets LBC [2025] UKSC 11
doi.org/10.1017/S000...
'Administrative Law Doctrine and Constitutional Principle in the Supreme Court'
My case note on the judgment in R (Spitalfields) v Tower Hamlets LBC [2025] UKSC 11
doi.org/10.1017/S000...
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW DOCTRINE AND CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE IN THE SUPREME COURT | The Cambridge Law Journal | Cambridge Core
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW DOCTRINE AND CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE IN THE SUPREME COURT - Volume 84 Issue 2
doi.org
November 18, 2025 at 10:37 AM
Now published in the Cambridge Law Journal (open access):
'Administrative Law Doctrine and Constitutional Principle in the Supreme Court'
My case note on the judgment in R (Spitalfields) v Tower Hamlets LBC [2025] UKSC 11
doi.org/10.1017/S000...
'Administrative Law Doctrine and Constitutional Principle in the Supreme Court'
My case note on the judgment in R (Spitalfields) v Tower Hamlets LBC [2025] UKSC 11
doi.org/10.1017/S000...
Thank you, Conor. That's very kind.
November 18, 2025 at 10:26 AM
Thank you, Conor. That's very kind.
Indeed. There are plenty of other questions, too, that are unanswered by a white paper that, given how long it has been in the making, is surprisingly light on detail. I flag some of the key legal and constitutional questions that need to be answered here: publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/11/17/t...
November 18, 2025 at 10:03 AM
Indeed. There are plenty of other questions, too, that are unanswered by a white paper that, given how long it has been in the making, is surprisingly light on detail. I flag some of the key legal and constitutional questions that need to be answered here: publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/11/17/t...
I agree, Jess.
November 18, 2025 at 9:50 AM
I agree, Jess.
That's very kind, David. But I was home alone and looking for something to do ... I am much more likely to be watching something on Netflix this evening!
November 18, 2025 at 9:13 AM
That's very kind, David. But I was home alone and looking for something to do ... I am much more likely to be watching something on Netflix this evening!
Reposted by Mark Elliott
Very good on the legal implications of today's proposals. There's still a lot of missing details.
New post
The legal and constitutional implications of the asylum white paper: Some initial thoughts
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/11/17/t...
The legal and constitutional implications of the asylum white paper: Some initial thoughts
publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/11/17/t...
The legal and constitutional implications of the asylum white paper: Some initial thoughts
Proposals for radical reform of the UK’s asylum system raise a number of legal and constitutional issues, with respect both to the European Convention on Human Rights and the domestic principle of …
publiclawforeveryone.com
November 17, 2025 at 10:44 PM
Very good on the legal implications of today's proposals. There's still a lot of missing details.