Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 14/09/2026Thank you to the International Association of Law Libraries (IALL) for inviting me to address their 44th Annual Course on 'Shifting Politics and Legal Realities'. In my lecture, I considered whether the UK constitution's idiosyncrasies might make it peculiarly vulnerable to the forces of populism. 060
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 21/07/2026New article: Mark Elliott and Nicholas Kilford, "The Relational Principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty" SSRN draft available to download; forthcoming in Public Law publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/07/21/t... @nearlydoctornick.bsky.socialpubliclawforeveryone.comThe relational principle of parliamentary sovereigntyIn a forthcoming article in Public Law, Nicholas Kilford and I examine three leading UK Supreme Court decisions that have subjected the principle of parliamentary sovereignty to notably unorthodox … 21111
Reposted by Mark ElliottSt Catharine's College @stcatharines.bsky.social · 11/06/2026We are proud that Catz Fellow Hend Hanafy (2021) led the coordination of the first official visit by a delegation from the #Egyptian Court of Cassation – the highest court in #Egypt – to the judiciary of England & Wales. Read our report: caths.cam.ac.uk/judi... Faculty of Law 093
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 27/05/2026That AI isn't yet "good enough" to mark students' essays ought to be beside the point. Outsourcing such tasks to AI is fundamentally incompatible with the intellectual engagement between student and professor that should be central to higher education. /1 www.cam.ac.uk/stories/ai-u...cam.ac.ukAI not yet good enough to mark university essays, rewarding ‘style over substance’Top AI systems show bias towards rewarding overly complex prose styles and only match human examiners for grade bands around half the time, research finds. 1359
Reposted by Mark ElliottDavid Burrows @dbfamilylaw.bsky.social · 26/05/2026@profmarkelliott.bsky.social Over a century on, precedents such as A Douglas-Home and P Gordon Walker seem like the dying embers of British constitutional history when the Prime Minister was permitted to lead the government from outside the House of Commons publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/05/26/t...publiclawforeveryone.comThe Prime Minister as an MP: A postscript on historical precedent and constitutional conventionIn an earlier post, I addressed the question whether the Prime Minister must be a member of the House of Commons. Here, I reflect briefly on some interesting points that have been raised in respons… 011
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 26/05/2026New post The Prime Minister as an MP: A postscript on historical precedent and constitutional convention publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/05/26/t...publiclawforeveryone.comThe Prime Minister as an MP: A postscript on historical precedent and constitutional conventionIn an earlier post, I addressed the question whether the Prime Minister must be a member of the House of Commons. Here, I reflect briefly on some interesting points that have been raised in respons… 066
Reposted by Mark ElliottDaniel Gover @danielgover.bsky.social · 26/05/2026🚨Could the Parliament Acts be used to pass assisted dying? As I say in this clip: 🔵 Never previously used on a PMB 🔵 But explicitly intended to apply to PMBs, not just govt bills 🔵 In practice, not straightforward to do, but possible 165
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 22/05/2026My blog, www.publiclawforeveryone.com, now features "Not by AI" badging. For more information on the Not by AI initiative, see: notbyai.fyi/not-by-ai-90.... 0103
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 21/05/2026Berkeley's new AI policy is laudable. Its post-plagiarism conception of AI misuse prohibits "conceptualisation" and "outlining". The guiding principle – that thinking remains the sine qua non of good lawyering (and of a quality legal education) – is surely right. www.law.berkeley.edu/wp-content/u...law.berkeley.edu 1157
Reposted by Mark ElliottJess O'Thomson @jessothomson.co.uk · 20/05/2026I think it's really difficult to understate the likely consequences this kind of revisionism will have going forward, for the rule of law in this country. And for some reason our judiciary has decided to dismantle its own power on the cusp of a likely authoritarian Reform government. Maddening. 0412
Reposted by Mark ElliottJess O'Thomson @jessothomson.co.uk · 20/05/2026Excellent piece on the continued judicial gutting of the common law. Can't help but note the apparent radical decline in the constitutional role of the judiciary since I was sat in Professor Elliott's lectures less than a decade ago. 4588
Reposted by Mark ElliottPhil Edwards @philedwards.bsky.social · 20/05/2026Ismailov v Foreign Secretary: Constitutional revisionism and the principle of legality publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/05/19/i... Alarming post from @profmarkelliott.bsky.social on current trends in constitutional law.publiclawforeveryone.comIsmailov v Foreign Secretary: Constitutional revisionism and the principle of legalityIn his judgment in Ismailov v Foreign Secretary, Saini J appears to endorse two incompatible views of the principle of legality. One of those views reconfigures a principle that has traditionally b… 021
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 20/05/2026Interesting piece on whether PM must be an MP, partly responding to my analysis (publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/05/14/d...). Key Q is whether precedent from 1960s remains persuasive. I doubt it, given 60+ years of now consistent practice. Convention flexes as practice & political mores develop.publiclawforeveryone.comDoes the Prime Minister have to be an MP?Uncertainty about the position of the Prime Minister has raised the question whether Andy Burnham, currently the Mayor of Greater Manchester, might return to the House of Commons in order to challe… 256
Reposted by Mark ElliottPaolo Sandro @paolosandro.bsky.social · 19/05/2026We're in the age of constitutional revisionism, sperheaded by the Reed/Sales court, and we now start seeing the effects trickling down the judicial system. No wonder the Judicial Power Project has gone all but quiet 1115
Reposted by Mark ElliottColin Murray @colinmurray.bsky.social · 19/05/2026New from @profmarkelliott.bsky.social on how the principle of legality is being treated restrictively in the High Court, following positions set by the UKSC justices. On multiple fronts the horizons of the UK judiciary's constitutional role are shrinking: publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/05/19/i... 072
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 19/05/2026On which now see: publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/05/19/i...publiclawforeveryone.comIsmailov v Foreign Secretary: Constitutional revisionism and the principle of legalityIn his judgment in Ismailov v Foreign Secretary, Saini J appears to endorse two incompatible views of the principle of legality. One of those views reconfigures a principle that has traditionally b… 171
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 19/05/2026New post Ismailov v Foreign Secretary: Constitutional revisionism and the principle of legality publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/05/19/i...publiclawforeveryone.comIsmailov v Foreign Secretary: Constitutional revisionism and the principle of legalityIn his judgment in Ismailov v Foreign Secretary, Saini J appears to endorse two incompatible views of the principle of legality. One of those views reconfigures a principle that has traditionally b… 02412
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 18/05/2026The gutting of the principle of legality – part of a much wider trend of constitutional regression in the senior courts' case law – continues apace. www.judiciary.uk/judgments/sa... 3186
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 18/05/2026Thank goodness Cambridge's Judge Business School might soon be providing “leadership development” and “innovation management” to the Saudi regime. Perhaps the "innovations" will include respect for basic human rights, including due process? www.theguardian.com/education/20...theguardian.comSons of jailed Saudi scholars urge Cambridge to drop plans to train Riyadh staffExclusive: Families of men facing death penalty join opposition to proposals to run courses for defence ministry 01712
Reposted by Mark ElliottJohn Wadham @john-wadham.bsky.social · 18/05/2026A very helpful analysis of the Chisinau Declaration. 063
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 18/05/2026New post From Chişinău to Makerfield: The Labour Party, populism and the politics of triangulation publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/05/18/f...publiclawforeveryone.comFrom Chişinău to Makerfield: The Labour Party, populism and the politics of triangulationThe Chişinău Declaration, issued by the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers on 15 May 2026, is an attempt by signatory States to reframe how the European Convention on Human Rights affects n… 158
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 14/05/2026New post: Does the Prime Minister have to be an MP? publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/05/14/d...publiclawforeveryone.comDoes the Prime Minister have to be an MP?Uncertainty about the position of the Prime Minister has raised the question whether Andy Burnham, currently the Mayor of Greater Manchester, might return to the House of Commons in order to challe… 51614
Reposted by Mark ElliottSt Catharine's College @stcatharines.bsky.social · 11/05/2026Admitting students with the greatest academic potential from a broad range of backgrounds is a key part of our new 5-year strategic plan: caths.cam.ac.uk/exce.... Since the plan was published in January 2026, we have engaged ~2,400 students from across the UK: caths.cam.ac.uk/wide... @can.ac.uk 142
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 24/04/2026New post – The fall of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: A constitutional outrage? publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/04/24/t...publiclawforeveryone.comThe fall of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: A constitutional outrage?As prorogation and a King’s Speech approach, the Terminally Ill Adults Bill cannot now be enacted before the end of the current parliamentary session. By blocking the Bill, has the House of Lords c… 013
Reposted by Mark ElliottJonathan Jones @sirjjkc.bsky.social · 14/04/2026Naturally @profmarkelliott.bsky.social is quite right. There is nothing new or unconstitutional about powers to track EU measures by secondary legislation (s. 2(2) of the European Communities Act 1972 did that while we were in the EU and ministers of all stripes used it all the time) 13111
Reposted by Mark ElliottGeorge Peretz KC @georgeperetzkc.bsky.social · 14/04/2026Typically clear and thorough demolition by @profmarkelliott.bsky.social of the claim that the forthcoming Bill providing for alignment with EU law is constitutionally objectionable. Recommended to lawyers and non-lawyers alike. publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/04/13/t...publiclawforeveryone.com“Dynamic alignment” with EU rules: Neither unconstitutional nor undemocraticThe forthcoming King’s Speech, it is reported, will include a Bill to facilitate “dynamic alignment” with some EU rules, attracting criticism from some politicians that sovereignty regained through… 01616
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 13/04/2026New post Some thoughts on the suggestion by pro-Brexit politicians that the government's proposal for "dynamic alignment" with EU rules would be a constitutional affront or would be an undemocratic subversion of the 2016 referendum. (It wouldn't.) publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/04/13/t...publiclawforeveryone.comThe constitutional implications of “dynamic alignment” with EU rulesThe forthcoming King’s Speech, it is reported, will include a Bill to facilitate “dynamic alignment” with some EU rules, attracting criticism from some politicians that sovereignty regained through… 13519
Reposted by Mark ElliottThe Constitution Society @consoc.bsky.social · 31/03/2026Out today: The latest edition of The Constitution In Review by the United Kingdom Constitution Monitoring Group. Their latest report covers 1 Jul-1 Dec 2025 and is required reading for all with an in interest the UK's constitutional arrangements. Read it now at: consoc.org.uk/publications... 163
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 05/03/2026In this interview with the SCOTUS Blog, which launches its series on global apex courts, I reflect on the role of the UK Supreme Court and consider whether adjudication at this level in the UK is really as apolitical as we often assume it to be. www.scotusblog.com/2026/03/the-...scotusblog.comThe UK Supreme CourtWelcome to SCOUTSblog’s newest recurring series, in which we interview experts on different supreme courts around the world and how they compare to our own. For our debut column, we […] 1149
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 26/02/2026The Divisional Court has now issued but immediately suspended a quashing order regarding the proscription of Palestine Action. This results in precisely the situation anticipated by my post below: a proscription order that is unlawful according to the High Court but unquashed for the time being. 075
Reposted by Mark ElliottFaculty of Law @cambridgelaw.bsky.social · 18/02/2026📢Registrations are open for our Open Day on 20 March. Come and learn about the course and admissions process, experience sample lectures and get a chance to chat with staff, students and alumni to see if it feels right for you! The event is free to attend: 🔗https://bit.ly/3Ojqsqk 021
Reposted by Mark ElliottPaolo Sandro @paolosandro.bsky.social · 17/02/2026Fantastic post by @profmarkelliott.bsky.social illustrating why the High Court's decision not to quash the unlawful (at least for now) proscription order of PA is conceptually, and arguably pragmatically, problematic. This case also shows why legal theory, and conceptual clarity especially, matter 283
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 17/02/2026In a new post on the Palestine Action case, I ask whether, given the High Court's conclusion that proscription was unlawful, the Metropolitan Police is right to say that the organisation remains a proscribed one. publiclawforeveryone.com/2026/02/17/i...publiclawforeveryone.comIf proscribing Palestine Action was unlawful, how can it still be a proscribed organisation?In the Ammori case, the High Court held that the Home Secretary’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act 2000 was unlawful. But a quashing order has not been issued and the … 0167
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 13/02/2026The 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.comThe High Court’s judgment in the Palestine Action caseThe 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… 21918
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 16/12/2025"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... 2157
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 15/12/2025A 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...theguardian.comJimmy Lai: conviction of Hong Kong pro-democracy figure decried as attack on press freedomRights groups dismiss ‘sham conviction’ of media tycoon on national security offences in city’s most closely watched rulings in decades 02110
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 15/12/2025New post: Correcting the record on the ‘primacy’ of the House of Commons publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/12/15/c...publiclawforeveryone.comCorrecting the record on the ‘primacy’ of the House of CommonsIn 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… 076
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 15/12/2025I'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... 090
Reposted by Mark ElliottDavid Anderson @bricksilk.bsky.social · 08/12/2025My speech of today to NIHRC now published in full by Joshua Rozenberg: “The ECHR - the view from London and Strasbourg”to.nowFor Sale Page 157
Reposted by Mark ElliottAnurag Deb @anuragdeb.bsky.social · 08/12/2025The 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. 282
Reposted by Mark ElliottMark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 07/12/2025Lord 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.comTaking the constitution seriously: A response to Lord SalesThe 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… 1127
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 07/12/2025Lord 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.comTaking the constitution seriously: A response to Lord SalesThe 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… 1127
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 07/12/2025This 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 12715
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 20/11/2025Simon 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...theguardian.comUnelected Lords are blocking assisted dying – this is a democratic outrage | Simon JenkinsSecond 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 074
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 20/11/2025New post: Tyranny, anarchy and the rule of law: Reflections on a major report by the Constitution Committee publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/11/20/t...publiclawforeveryone.comTyranny, anarchy and the rule of law: Reflections on a major report by the Constitution CommitteeThe 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… 11414
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 18/11/2025Now 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...doi.orgADMINISTRATIVE LAW DOCTRINE AND CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE IN THE SUPREME COURT | The Cambridge Law Journal | Cambridge CoreADMINISTRATIVE LAW DOCTRINE AND CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE IN THE SUPREME COURT - Volume 84 Issue 2 242
Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 18/11/2025Indeed. 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...publiclawforeveryone.comThe legal and constitutional implications of the asylum white paper: Some initial thoughtsProposals 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 … 086
Reposted by Mark ElliottSam Freedman @samfr.bsky.social · 17/11/2025Very good on the legal implications of today's proposals. There's still a lot of missing details. 13814
Reposted by Mark ElliottSchona Jolly KC @womaninhavana.bsky.social · 17/11/2025Excellent place to start on the legal and constitutional implications of the asylum white paper. And, as ever, Mark manages to pen these articulate thoughts so fast. 23816