ETVT sovereignty still lies with Parliament

T1 – Devolution, no

Dispersal of power erodes parl sov.

Scotland Act 1998 created Scottish Parl, and Smith Commision (devomax) & 2016 Scotland Act gave full fiscal autonomy, powers over domestic policy e.g. NHS, Housing, Econ dev. Allows to introduce policy more suited for left wing pop (indicated by SNP dominance since 2007) e.g. Free prescriptions, Free Uni tuition, Inc top rate income tax to 48% (all of which unsupported in England).
Scot has right to 50% of all VAT raised in Scot.

Welsh Senned granted PLP after 2011 ref, allows similar powers. Able to pass Welsh Language Measure Act (make official language). Law specific to them not applicable to England, parl sov limited over these matters.

Bodies function much more as self-determining and independent, subject to less parl influence therefore parl less sov.

T1 – Devolution, yes

Parliament functionally retains power over devolved bodies (esp for largest matters).

Sewel convention, implied parl “will not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters”. Nature of convention is non binding, could abolish devolved assemblies in single act shows limits to independence. Uncodified constitution allows parl to retain legal sovereignty.

Demonstrated by parl refusal of indyref2, consensus among most Westminster parties that it is bad (despite sig support in Scotland 73/129 MSPs pro independence). Sturgeon calls for independence until resignation 2023, Swinney independence vote 2026 will inevitably be blocked. Consequence of unrepresentative FPTP, allows major parties to retain governance, both oppose further independence, amplifies control over body.

Section 35 Scotland Act allows UK gov to block bill with “adverse effect” on UK-wide law, used in veto to 2023 Gender Recognition Reform Bill, judicial review justified action

Devolved legislation ultimately conditional upon Westminster’s consent, is able to intervene and prevent the Scottish Parliament’s (along with others) law from taking effect

T1 – Devolution, overall

While functionally Devolved bodies have political sovereignty, ultimate jurisdiction still lies with parliament they created devolution and so have some control over the bodies still. While they would face unbelievable backlash for abolishing devolved bodies, they are legally allowed to, making inherent inferiority of bodies to parl due to sovereignty ever present.

T2 – Supreme court, no

SC can make fundamental decisions that counter parl sov.

Law Lords verdict against parl in case of Factortame showed EU law takes primacy, open waters forced repealing of Merchants Shipping Act 1988, Parl did not retain sov in matter regarding own country.

SC given mechanism to challenge sovereign acts of parliament with fDOIs that have led to sig change e.g. Steinfeld v Secretary of State for Education argued inequality between hetero/homosexual (marriage / marriage + civil partnerships) violates HRA, led to Civil Partnership (Opposite-sex Couples) Regulations, rectifying issues. Mechanism challenges parl sov and can lead to legislative change

Able to halt gov policy despite being unelected, maintain sig political power.

T2 – Supreme Court, yes

Supreme Court rulings are still ultimately advisory; parliament can ignore them.

Previous case of Factortame no longer applies,

Parliament has many ways around SC. Belmarsh 9 FDOI ruled, gov ignored despite discriminatory practices and 8-1 ruling. Only overturned after public outrage. No FDOI can be unwillingly enforced, parl retains sov.

Ouster clauses limit ability of judicial review e.g. Section 2 of Safety of Rwanda Act, forcing Rwanda declared as safe, preventing court ruling of rights violation. Mechanism exists to prevent accountability from judiciary.

Supreme Court can also rule in favour of parl sov
Miller 1, gave parl power to leave EU (due to parl entering EEC) despite public Brexit vote.

Constitutional change can only come through parliament. Despite political pressure from SC / Referendums, parl is constitutionally supreme.

T2 – Supreme Court, overall

Supreme court limited by unelected nature, difficult to control order of elected body as their mandate is greater. SC ability to challenge parl undermined by Parl ability to ignore SC.

CCLN

Parl not dominant in controlling all UK politics, but ultimately sov remains with them when best fits their interest.