Opening of UK Supreme Court

[jaylee6038]

Thanks for Help us spread the word, Time is matter You Help our Family Safe,Free,Equal Justice. God Bless You Jay Lee Julz Lee Diamondz Juliana Perez Lee,Charly Lee Jay Lee U.S. Supreme Court Case # 10-9061 Jay Lee Thanks God With You... Bless You!... JayJulz Lee DiamondzJay Lee Family Bye Jay Julz Lee Diamondz

KFOR-TV

[UzumakiMatrix]

you better not my show up!!! or ill go insane!! LEAVE BEDINORM ALONE!!!

MILLIONS RELY ON THE SHOW!!!!

MY SHOW!!!! WILL NOT BE STOPPED

[911FalseFlagTerror01]

The justices look different than the US Supreme Court justices.

[teabag3339]

“The one great principle of English law is to make business for itself”. - Charles Dickens.

[MusicPredominates]

@teabag3339 : Quite an interesting observation. However, Mr. Brown got it wrong ! The Queen is head of the judiciary. They are Her courts.

[jopeon1983]

@MusicPredominates no.. they are the people's courts, the queen is symbolic only and irrelevant.

[MusicPredominates]

@jopeon1983 : The U.K is not a republic and thus they are 'Er Majesty's Courts ! And Gordon-Warden is merely the Queen's First Minister and should not be opening this noo court at all !

[jopeon1983]

@MusicPredominates is there something wrong with you, maybe you should see someone

[MusicPredominates]

@jopeon1983 : Hey. You are only twenty-eight (28) years of age. You must be so terribly insecure. If Rumpole of the Bailey was a real pewrson and looked at Youtube, he might have muttered the same thing ! I think that you should look at the Doctrine of Separation of Powers. In fact thsi court change was in a way supposed to be circumscribed by thet doctrine. Maybe I am very lonely at this time of the year !

[MusicPredominates]

@jopeon1983 : In a way you are right. May be they the courts belong to big business or the elites that run the world. But anyway, under the auspices of multticulturalism there is no 'people' ; merely tribes !

[ToxicOdiousOne]

Do they really dress like Washington and Jefferson to this day?

[alonelychild]

800 years of tradition of Law!

[RaleighDawlishRaynar]

Ah yes - The UK Supreme Court. Independent? Of course they are!

Subject: the nine dash bin nightmare

Anagram: High Inn - them sneer - bin data

[Kisonica]

@RaleighDawlishRaynar They are independent. Its the United Kingdon not Iran...

[ExNausea]

Does this affect the UK's fusion of powers in anyway?

[UKDirtySecret]

Councillor Sheena Williams resigned from the Tory party after they stole her 4 young granddaughters in Kent for forced adoption

this is the thanks for winning a seat never held by the Tories , first-time !

[Tzimnewman3]

This isn't teh highest court since the EU courts have the final say.

[GeorgeMaier]

It is the highest domestic court. The ECJ and other EU courts may only decide on matters of European importance. Also, you must keep in mind the idea that the UK being member of the EU is not entrenched, and Britain could at any time, being the will of parliament, remove itself from the EU.

[Tzimnewman3]

Good observation.

Still it changes nothing, the highest court in the the UK is the EU courts untill we remove ourselves from the EU which I can't see happening.

[UKDirtySecret]

Robert Green in Grampian Police custody

Robert had gone to Aberdeen to campaign for justice for Hollie Greig, and to announce his intention to stand for election there as an MP on the single issue of Hollies case.

Why is the disgusting sexual abuse that this poor girl suffered at the hands of so-called 'care' workers including a judge, being hidden under the carpet?

[UKDirtySecret]

The John Adams Street Club

We Have Here The Major Centre For The Control Of The UK.. Not Only The Benefactor From Destruction Of The UK, Very Much The Cause, This Is The British Crowns Secret Control Centre

[UKDirtySecret]

Maybe they should watch Brian Gerrish (common purpose) 'child stealing by the state' on utube

for the real criminals in the UK the child snatching captial o f europe

[cjellwood]

Jack Straw has an interesting history

[Hkepfer]

Rudeness to the nth degree.

He blathers endlessly and the Queen is left to stand & endure.

Couldn't someone offer the nice lady a chair?

She is Queen after all.

[delacaravanio]

Why is Jack Straw wearing that ridicilous outfit? He's standing next to Brown.

[Stoozer]

Jack Straw, as Secretary of State for Justice is also the holder of the more ancient and higher office of Lord Chancellor and is thus wearing the Lord Chancellor's gown.

[ianmann64]

I will miss reding the judgments of the appellate committe of the House of Lordsand the judicial committee of the Privy Council.

[PariahOlympics]

Fascinating.....historic moment if their stated objectives can be achieved at all.....I am afraid I've always agreed with Orwell on that one.....but at the very least the 'pursuit' of justice is essential. (if we still have a desire for it as a species at all....depressing thought)

[Medeasbiggestfan]

The Law Lords had existed for almost 200 years before the creation of this court, which will do exactly the same work as the Law Lords.

The only difference is that they are no longer part of the legislature - which I think is a bad thing and will make their stated goals less likely to be achieved, sadly.

[PariahOlympics]

Medeasbiggestfan:

Quite true that it's existed for 200 yrs, but then again Britain was an empire at that time under which the geopolitical mandates became the law. Times change, information overload and daily development of civil issues need more exacting scrutiny than from those with political agendas. No Im only concerned about an ages old government still working under the pretense of monarchy for bureaucratic gain would be perfectly willing to use 'justice' as a screen for other power gains

[Medeasbiggestfan]

The Law Lords were never had a political agenda, nor did they ever seek power or bureaucratic gain.

The Law Lords' judicial duties haven't changed now they've become the Supreme Court, but they have lost the ability to comment on and vote on bills going through Parliament. Surely that's a great loss?

[Rohivanion]

If the Law Lords never had any political agenda how can it be a 'great loss' that they lose the right to vote on bills. The whole point of establishing the suprime court was to seperate the influence of those who make the laws and those who act on the laws.

[Medeasbiggestfan]

They weren't driven by party politics, but they could comment on the legality of bills before they became law. Who would know better than the highest judges in the land whether a piece of legislation was legal and constitutional?

Why is it necessary to separate the legislature and judiciary? They only separation of power which matters is between the executive and the judiciary, and the UK has had that for centuries.

[Rohivanion]

Why is it necessary to have someone in the legislative body comment on the legality of bills when they can do that in their position in the judiciary? It is not, in fact, the practice of most countries to have specific legal posts within the legislative bodies.

As for separating legislature and judiciary, this attempts to prevent any sort of bias coming about from being members of both the judiciary and legislature. Even law lords have their own personal agenda which cannot be avoided.

[Medeasbiggestfan]

The Law Lords could amend legislation before it became law to improve it and make sure it was constitutional. Now they have to wait before it becomes law (and potential hurt people) before they can judge its legality and they can't write amendments to make it legal.

Of course the Law Lords had their own personal opinions, and they still do now they are the Supreme Court. I think in both cases their Lordships can be impartial as the law requires and as they have done throughout their careers.

[tbdmAsshy]

I love how they all start clapping as she gets out the car.

In awe how her feeble, old limbs could keep her standing.

[swimmerdude220]

The Queen looks pretty good for her age... LONG LIVE THE QUEEN!!!!!

[sidewalkpilot]

I'd fuck her. She is hot for an old broad. I'd last 3 seconds.

[enuvune]

america jr.

[battenorama]

If you knew anything about English politics you'd be aware that England and the USA have completely different political systems.

[sidewalkpilot]

she is so sexy. oh yeah. i'd last 3 seconds inside of her.

[arequipa1]

are you a gay?

[sidewalkpilot]

why? do you want to ask me out? no - sorry.

[arequipa1]

no, i have a coule big burly friends who want to pound you in the face and then show you what a bitch you are. you're game.

[spungii117]

hell yeah canadian cousin i would nut all over that ass

haha

[formulaprimer]

I thought it was a costume party or a drag show before I read the title. o)

[0o0dead0o0]

gordon brown ftw!

[sidewalkpilot]

what does ftw mean?

[0o0dead0o0]

for the win =/

[Aaberg123]

They are like the Vatican. Looking too fucking ridiculous to be taken seriously.

[nidaros1112]

Some countries actually have traditions and culture! You are just a silly child that does not understand the power of symbols and courts.

The world does not care if you think they look "funny", those men still have more power than you will ever have! And they can still have you locked up!

The symbols help remind everyone involved that they are not just people there to do a job but representatives of the state and court.

[Aaberg123]

Does men in silly wigs invoke a sense of submission and exhibit authority to your? Really?

Could you take a ruling seriously had the judge been dressed as a clown? Because these are not far from it.

I full well understand the importance of cultural heritage and symbolism. However, could you take King Harald seriously in ANY way was he dressed like Louis XVI? I think not.

Contemporary courts for modern times!

So get down from your pathetic high horse and smell the roses, you nostalgic fool.

[Medeasbiggestfan]

I think it's a bit pointless removing the Law Lords from Parliament. They said it was to protect separation of powers, but the only separation that matters is between the executive and the judiciary, and we've had that in the UK for centuries.

The Law Lords were very useful as part of the leguislature as they could advise on the legality of bills. We have lost that with the creation of this court.

[battenorama]

But if a bill is passed by parliament it is legal irrespective of its content (unless it's in conflict with ECA)

[Medeasbiggestfan]

The Law Lords could comment on and amend bills before they were passed by Parliament.

[theredraven]

They wouldn't actually do that. Law Lords very rarely (if ever) took part in debates in the House of Lords.

The point of them in the Lords and now in the Supreme Court is to rule on points of law. A piece of legislation that was challenged might be heard by them but they probably wouldn't debate in the chamber and such.

[Medeasbiggestfan]

They did enter into debates on contentious issues, and those are the cases when the Lords would want to know what the country's top constitutional experts thought.

Now they have to either veto such a bill or wait for it to become law to see what the Supreme Court thinks.

[gladmax]

First! God save the Brits!