I actually quotes two subsections. If you read the judgement you’ll understand that the case hinges on the Home Office policy, not the legislation. It’s that policy which the court found constrained … (View Post)

I stand corrected on that point, but that doesn’t change the general principle against what you are arguing. (View Post)

That’s not how this works at all (View Post)

It has been a while since I studied public law but “proportionality” has been used before by the courts to constrain public powers. I personally think that Parliament should legislate the test of pro… (View Post)

Yeah, of course. The power is: Terrorism Act 2000, s3 (4) The Secretary of State may exercise his power under subsection (3)(a) in respect of an organisation only if he believes that it is concerned … (View Post)