Change Player Size
Watch this video in a new window

Opening of UK Supreme Court

Arrival of Queen Elizabeth II, meeting and greeting with staffers & justices speeches by UK Supreme Court President Lord Nicholas Phillips and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.  
 
Customize

More From: CSPAN

Q&A: Economist Judy Shelton59:14
620 views
The Communicators: FCC Chair Genachowski31:38
444 views
Carl Levin on the Fort Hood shootings7:35
1,556 views
Cox Middle GA. & C-SPAN Civics Bus Road Update 11/20/090:44
334 views
Nov 18 2009 .mov0:40
292 views
Senator Robert Byrd on Congressional Service8:31
780 views
Attorney General Holder speaks to 9/11 Families5:11
2,314 views
C-SPAN Civics Bus update from the Road Nov 17 20090:31
341 views
Sen. Robert Byrd on the 1964 Civil Rights laws3:17
2,503 views
Sen. Robert Byrd on what he would advise a new Senator2:03
804 views
Sen. Robert Byrd Reflects on the Senate2:02
1,766 views
Q&A: Raymond Smock59:48
195 views
The Communicators: Gov 2.0 Summit29:40
567 views
C-SPAN StudentCam - Copyright and Fair Use2:06
683 views
Newt Gingrich on RNC First Principles for 2010 elections3:32
27,233 views
The Communicators:  Rick Cotton34:31
394 views
Uploading your documentary to C-SPAN's 2010 StudentCam site3:06
398 views
Downloading video clips from C-SPAN's 2010 StudentCam site0:00
591 views
Downloading video clips from C-SPAN's StudentCam site3:18
255 views
Q&A:  Melvin Urofsky58:03
277 views

QuickList(0)

Featured Videos

Upgrade to Flash Player 10 for improved playback performance. Upgrade Now or get more info.
24 ratings
Sign in to rate
3,503 views
Want to add to Favorites? Sign In or Sign Up now!
Want to add to Playlists? Sign In or Sign Up now!
Want to flag a video? Sign In or Sign Up now!

Statistics & Data

Loading...

Video Responses (0)

This video has no Responses. Be the first to Post a Video Response.
Sign in to post a Comment

Text Comments (37)   Options

Loading...
battenorama (1 week ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
But if a bill is passed by parliament it is legal irrespective of its content (unless it's in conflict with ECA)
Medeasbiggestfan (1 week ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
The Law Lords could comment on and amend bills before they were passed by Parliament.
theredraven (1 day ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
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 (1 day ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
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.
battenorama (1 week ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
If you knew anything about English politics you'd be aware that England and the USA have completely different political systems.
delacaravanio (3 weeks ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Why is Jack Straw wearing that ridicilous outfit? He's standing next to Brown.
Stoozer (2 weeks ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
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.
Comment(s) marked as spam Show
ianmann64 (1 month ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
I will miss reding the judgments of the appellate committe of the House of Lordsand the judicial committee of the Privy Council.
Medeasbiggestfan (1 month ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
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.

Would you like to comment?

Join YouTube for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.