If it is acceptable for the Supreme Court to consider the motives of the Prime Minister then what of the consideration of the motives of those bringing the case to Court?  We were not allowed an audience.

As we were not allowed an audience to give our thoughts or consideration, The List-Brexit has sent an email to the Supreme Court Judges.  We may not have the financial funding that Gina Miller accepts, but that should allow our consideration from not being heard.  After all, we gave the Prime Minister a mandate, twice. Gina Miller has no  mandate.  Below you can read our email sent to all Supreme Court Judges. pdf. format Email Letter





UPDATE :  Read their reply here


160 thoughts on “SupremeCourtAppeal

  1. Venice Commission Chapter 5 point 4.1:
    To uphold the Law to which they are bound to above, all those ‘remainers’ in Parliament should have stepped down. They should still have dealt with their constituents in local and national matters, but had a Brexit colleague dealing with Brexit, who wanted Brexit.

    Then we would not have had to endure the rubbish deal fiasco. We voted for no deal. We would also not have to witness democracy breaking down via the courts.

    Trying to find light in a sea of despair, is that now 17.4 million people can now clearly see how far the tentacles spread of the globalists, ie all the way to the courts. Wakey Wakey. No wonder Trump changed so many U.S. Judges.

    Populist movements around the world are unstoppable – Let it Roll…….


  2. Pingback: The List-Brexit
  3. If this was a difficult point of law as reflected in the disagreements in the High Courts why was the verdict unanimous among 11 judges? Very suspicious,spiderwoman! I wonder how many of this lot voted leave.

    Norman walker


  4. Norman,

    I don’t think any of them voted to LEAVE because the Supreme Court is an E.U. Institution, not that it is ever broadcasted. Tony Blair got rid of the ancient title of Lord Chancellor and moved the Law Lords out of the House of Lords into the Supreme Court in order to enact European Law, which is alien to our legal system; in addition they also had to accept Diversity and Multiculturalism. The Law Lords who could not accept this remit and did not wish to move, were retired early on substantial pensions.


  5. If they stated ‘ therefore the prorogation of parliament never happened’ how can Boris be found to have broken the law for something that never happened!!!!

    Plus the judges have NEVER stated just which LAW was broken, to be a lawbreaker you must have broken an actual Law. This is plainly politically motivated.


  6. The Supreme Court has ignored the legal vote of the Majority of the Electorate to leave the EU. This cannot be right. Perhaps the Judges need removing, if their judgements are so poor!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s