Tom Hickman
@TomRHickman
Followers
10,775
Following
321
Media
211
Statuses
3,311
KC Professor of Public Law UCL, Constitutional and Administrative law, National Security. RTs = interesting not endorsement
Joined August 2013
Don't wanna be here?
Send us removal request.
Explore trending content on Musk Viewer
Palestina
• 253760 Tweets
Whindersson
• 246819 Tweets
Mbappe
• 223441 Tweets
Madres
• 150241 Tweets
Joost
• 144033 Tweets
Endrick
• 87176 Tweets
Mother's Day
• 84688 Tweets
Bannon
• 65801 Tweets
Felipe Neto
• 61338 Tweets
الكويت
• 59282 Tweets
Dhoni
• 57202 Tweets
TREAT YOUR ARTISTS EQUALLY
• 48646 Tweets
Copa América
• 48186 Tweets
#الاتحاد_الاتفاق
• 36277 Tweets
الامم المتحده
• 33917 Tweets
SALVEM O DOGUINHO DO TELHADO
• 29012 Tweets
Trenes Argentinos
• 26671 Tweets
Palermo
• 26044 Tweets
Paris Saint-Germain
• 21050 Tweets
Thala
• 21008 Tweets
مجلس الامه
• 20260 Tweets
Nasser
• 19799 Tweets
Rodrygo
• 17263 Tweets
الجمعيه العامه
• 16793 Tweets
$ATS
• 14702 Tweets
Northern Lights
• 14246 Tweets
#استمرار_السالم_مرفوض3
• 13957 Tweets
Rahane
• 13629 Tweets
#KızılcıkŞerbeti
• 12544 Tweets
Pinned Tweet
An end to the ban on Parliamentary footage in satirical broadcasts agreed by HoC Administration Committee, according to Today's Times (Martin Beckford). For the context see:
3
8
52
Gina Miller has issued proceedings to challenge prorogation. Mishcon de Reya, Lord Pannick QC, Warren Fitt and me acting. Hence my Twitter silence today.
283
1K
4K
(1) So, the 14 day quarantine regs. How do they affect your summer holiday plans? Your work? Let me explain. And let me explain some surprising features of the rules.
100
804
1K
Ministers such as the Chancellor who receive a FPN, if they accept it, are likely in breach of the Ministerial Code, which requires that they comply with the law 1/…
13
321
1K
Bang on from
@AdamWagner1
the Home Secretary simultaneously said rules were ‘clear’ and got them wrong (recreation is no longer an reason for leaving home); and also sought to emphasise their stringency whilst invoking a wider no-longer existent exception. A mess.
Home Secretary: "The rules are very simple and clear... only leave home for a very very limited number of reasons... outdoor recreation but in a very very restricted and limited way"
Outdoor recreation was removed as a reasonable excuse for leaving home in lockdown regulations🤦♂️
160
543
2K
34
314
946
Change this headline to ‘Ukrainian refugees will be sent to Rwanda’ and then see what you think.
10
284
775
I have updated and added to my thread on resignation letters by the Prime Minister's advisers citing legal and ethical failings on part the PM and his Government.
A collection of resignation statements.
Sept 2020, Lord Keen, Advocate General for Scotland, resigns over Gov breach of international law:
10
291
652
14
358
707
Listening to the excellent
@RestIsPolitics
@RoryStewartUK
@campbellclaret
on the Begum case has brought home to me just how much confusion there is about the deprivation of citizenship power. Here are 7 important facts about the power, starting with some common misconceptions :…
22
327
715
A collection of resignation statements.
Sept 2020, Lord Keen, Advocate General for Scotland, resigns over Gov breach of international law:
10
291
652
Eleven (I think fascinating) things I’ve learnt about the German Constitutional Court over the past few days:
9
205
588
From today the criminal law imposes the "rule of 6" on everbody in society. Some initial thoughts on the problematic nature and context of this rule and why it needs to be given very close scrutiny in Parliament and a better solution found [Thread]
20
225
580
A long thread on the making of today’s face covering regulations and some reflections on coronavirus law-making in general. Consider this timeline:
27
241
397
This is crazy abracadabra governance. Criminal laws that regulate everyone’s ordinarily lives being produced like a rabbit from a hat 🎩 on a Sunday afternoon and in force the next day.
Argh it is so frustrating that these regulations don't get put to parliament at least for debate. It's madness. These are huge changes and they affect every single person in England, and there are loads of potentially unclear and difficult bits. Why so reluctant to engage debate?
35
161
381
6
186
411
Urgency procedure again! Rather than the days and days law students spend on the minute of the concept of Parliamentary sovereignty, the time would be better spent on how Gov controls, sidesteps and acts with disdain towards parliament.
13
122
302
As Lady Hale leaves the SC (boo!) and joins UCL (hooray!) I think it requires emphasis that she was for almost FOURTEEN YEARS the only female judge in our highest court. (Thread)
4
60
268
Should the UK withdraw from the ECHR? Lawyers are well placed to identify some of the consequences of membership and of leaving but ultimately it’s a political question. Not, though, a very difficult one IMO.
12
128
272
(6.5) Whilst the UK Gov website proclaims this a UK wide approach starting on 7 June there are currently no regs have been published outside England. Therefore if you enter the UK outside England or live outside England on Monday: no quarantine.
41
74
262
The revelation today that the Carrie Johnson story was pulled at the request of the PM’s office is concerning from a constitutional perspective - Telegraph:
7
87
253
In March the U.K. was subject to the most severe and wide ranging restrictions on liberty probably ever imposed. But to what extent were we following legal rules and to what extent was the lockdown advisory?
11
81
226
The resignation of Sir Jonathan Jones raises questions such as: ‘How sure does a Government lawyer have to be before advising that proposed conduct will be unlawful?’ And: ‘how certain does it have to be that conduct will be unlawful before a Minister should not proceed?’
4
97
229
Full text of letter here:
@ProfMarkElliott
@Prof_Phillipson
@jeff_a_king
@AileenMcHarg
@DrTomPoole
@UCLLaws
+ others
10
130
224
(6.4) Burried in the schedule is an exception for people whose work requires weekly travel to the UK or to countries outside the UK. So most frequent work travellers are exempted from quarantine and can continue to come and go as they please.
25
56
201
(4) There isn't even the "reasonable excuse" exception (otherwise known as the Dominic Cummings exception) like there used to be in the lockdown regs.
1
26
196
It is remarkable to see this account given of the reasons for prorogation as being to halt parliamentary resistance to Johnson, as the Government was not prepared to give this explanation at the time; …
1/ Fiery exchange between Meg Russell
@ConUnit_UCL
and
@nmdacosta
on the 2019 prorogation of parliament.
In three parts.
How it started.
1/3
Source:
@UKandEU
Constitution & Governance in UK Conference.
H/t
@jillongovt
8
39
97
2
86
194
Confused by what is law and what is guidance? Have an estimated 8 minutes to spare? Then try this by me, just published:
17
91
189
Those who question judicial review, who consider it politics by other means might ask themselves: For students predicted As and awarded Bs Cs Us, What other recourse do they have? Complain to their MP? Wasn’t the decision on how to award grades high policy? And ...
More details of our legal challenge to the A Level tragi-shambles (which compliments that brought by our friends, the brilliant
@Foxglovelegal
) follow. THREAD
92
1K
3K
9
53
188
Is a breach of the Covid regs "minor" or equivalent to a "parking ticket". Not according to the CPS charging guidance (below) that was in place throughout the duration of the various restriction regulations. Blog perhaps
@AdamWagner1
@PippaWoodrow
?
6
71
184
(6.2) These are more stringent restrictions on liberty than those people *diagnosed with* or *displaying symptoms* of Covi-19 are subject to - 7 day isolation, based on guidance, entirely voluntary and based on individual responsibility.
2
28
180
This creates a second tier of British citizenship with people who might - even unbeknownst to them - have a claim to be a citizen of another country being vulnerable to having their British citizenship removed by executive discretion. That may be you.
4
31
177
Anyone who thought that UK constitutional law had moved beyond the era of statues being disapplied for conflict with EU law, and the whole Factortame issue was confined to legal history, was wrong. This week the High Court (NI) disapplied 10 sections of an Act passed last year …
6
57
174
(3) The regs would require you to stay at home full stop. No leaving for exercise, not even once round the block. No leaving for shopping, unless you are on brink of starvation and no-one can go for you ("exceptional circumstances") No cleaner, no nanny,...
8
37
162
Of course, this disproportionately affects immigrants and their descendants. This is why many regard the power as discriminatory and clearly in this sense it is.
3
10
164
So, what about the Supreme Court’s Rwanda ruling? What next?
First, the ruling.
The SC delivered an emphatic decision that UK asylum seekers sent to Rwanda will face a real risk of being sent back to their countries of origin.
3
75
163
Excellent thread by
@seanjonesqc
on the Uber decision. Parliament decides what socio economic rights we have, courts apply the law. It’s just silly to accuse courts of socio economic bias for applying that law. More so if you don’t even think they got the law wrong.
This is very odd piece on the Uber decision from the Spectator Law Review. First, the SC categorically did not decide that the drivers "are entitled to all the protections that come with being an employee". This was a case about worker status not employee status /1
16
106
293
3
31
158
This year I’ll be giving the UCL LLB lectures on (a) sovereignty, (b) delegated legislation, (c) rule of law. Somehow I’ve landed the best bits. It’s going to be a Brexit / Miller / Covid rollercoaster this year ... suddenly even delegated legislation is fascinating!
4
6
162
Can you appeal Covid FPN fines? Common sense says yes, surely you can - they could have significant consequences and some are very large -but the answer is in fact no. 1/ …
Are Police fines for Covid regs breaches serious ? Or minor ? My tweet below set out the position taken by the Crown Prosecution Service throughout the duration of the restriction regs :
5
29
56
10
54
159
Is the separation of powers a principle of our constitution? Yesterday Lord Hoffmann in a short speech in the Lords said that it is, consistently with statements he made judicially. And that the Rwanda is Safe Bill breached the principle.
5
44
156
(6.1). As I have hinted at, these restrictions on liberty are far more severe than were imposed, and were *effective*, at the height of the pandemic, when transmission rates in the UK were very high.
3
25
150
This is quite a collection of men and women of principle who have resigned on principle because of serious irremediable disregard for law and/or the ethical code that the Government commits to.
7
35
152
(10) Yesterday (for the first time in its history) the court summoned a foreign lawyer to give evidence on comparative law. The judicial questioning was insightful, rigorous and included some curve balls! It is an understatement to say it was an enormous privilege.
5
9
151
This follows the pattern of coronavirus regulations where criminal laws affecting everyone’s daily lives are produced (without consultation, debate or the imprimatur of a majority of the legislature) like a rabbit from a Ministerial hat 🎩 hours before they come into effect.
3
50
142
(5) These rules are criminal law, backed by criminal law sanctions.
2
22
143
In sum, since the mid 2000s, people can have their British citizenship taken away under a broadly framed executive power without the need to prove allegations of wrongdoing, without adherence to principles of natural justice and without independent determination of the merits.
2
51
143
Sir Jonathan Jones the head lawyer in the civil service resigned for the same reasons; given the civil service code requirement for civil servants to comply with the law:
1
36
142
The Pannick/Pobjoy opinion has brought the summer slumber of legal twitter to an abrupt end and divided opinion. A lot of very good commentary has already been generated in past 24 hrs. There’s also been a tendency towards people coming out ,all for’ or ‘all against’ the opinion.
8
46
141
(6) It is an open and welcoming court which seems to have great public affection and trust. There is however no cafe and no gift shop.
3
7
141
(6.3) The restrictions apply in an entirely blanket fashion even from arrivals from countries with v low transmission levels. Contrast England with 17k each day:
2
19
134
Scots and English social distancing rules to diverge further. Scottish rules look to be overall more restrictive but crucially less arbitrary and more permissive in allowing households to meet outdoors (friends, parents etc). That’s clever and will cause less friction and dissent
1
32
137
Today David Wolfon QC resigned over the multiple law breaking in Downing Street:
1
37
137
@davidallengreen
One thing that stands out to me is the description of the ‘threat level’ as being the ‘current public health danger’, meaning risk of *infection on that day*. But most people would understand ‘threat’ to mean future risk, ie of *being infected by Coronavirus*
7
9
131
There is an irony in the Government invoking judicial review, particularly in what might be regarded as a highly political dispute... I hope Lord Faulks is taking note (Greenwich backs down over plans to close schools in face of legal action).
6
22
131
Lord Wolfson QC’s resignation letter makes a notable reference to the fact that resigning is required by the ‘rule of law’. Why? Well, it may be a not-so-coded message to his boss
@DominicRaab
Justice Sec and Lord Chancellor, who took an oath to respect the rule of law:
3
38
125
This is a very important point from
@redhistorian
. The constitutional principle upon which PMs are appointed is that they are the person most likely to command the confidence of Parliament. It is entirely consistent with this principle for a new leader of a parliamentary party ..
This is true: but it's also why allowing party members to appoint a prime minister is so undemocratic.
Major policy changes on tax, spending, NetZero & defence are being proposed to suit the wishes of a tiny group of people, whom no one elected & whom we cannot hold to account.
24
254
835
3
34
127
Yes it’s a difficult changing situation but the pattern is clear: avoidance of parliamentary scrutiny rather than enabling it. That is unfortunate for many reasons, including that it damages the legitimacy (and quality) of public health laws.
1
31
122
The Attorney General’s opinion on whether the law has been broken has a special status in our constitution. It’s an opinion that should be given only when requested, in the public interest and in confidence. Not today though, apparently.
7
29
126
@AdamWagner1
This is what happens when laws are made with no consultation or legislative process. Eg How can two people together indoors be a ‘gathering’ ? Does it really mean ‘two or more people’ not ‘more than two people’? If so, why not say, you can’t meet ‘anyone’ indoors.
6
24
126
(2) You may be thinking that people arriving in the UK - including you returning from a summer holiday - would have to observe the sort of stay at home measures you were observing in March and April. Wrong.
2
32
120
(7) It is about as far away from Berlin as it’s posible to get without being in France.
3
3
118
(6) Here's some surprising features of this system. In lawyerly sub para numbers.
1
13
112
Having slept on the draft Englsih Coronavirus amendment regs (I am not quite geeky enough to mean that literally).
Ok ok I probably am. But I didn't.
My thoughts are these.... [long thread]
11
43
115
(1) Deprivation of citizenship (DoC) is not the same as withdrawal of a passport, it is more fundamental, preventing people not just from travelling but having a right to live in the UK, benefiting from rights dependent on citizenship and from the protection of the UK Gov.
2
13
115
Robert Buckland’s thoughtful UCL speech on the rule of law is being much discussed. But other than expressing implicit disagreement with two Supreme Court cases (privacy international and evans) is there much more to it? I don’t think so.
3
40
109
The only ‘hard edged’ limit on the power is that on balance of probabilities the person must have a second citizenship (whether they know it or not).
14
12
114
That doesn’t mean dismissal follows, although one might think committing a significant public health offence in a pandemic might ordinarily entail such consequences (Cf the various resignations for breaching lockdown rules inc Matt Hancock), it’s ultimately up to the PM 2/…
3
23
110
And let’s not forget the resignation in Nov 2020 of Sir Alex Allan the PM’s former adviser on standards after Johnson rejected his report that found Priti Patel guilty of bullying, a breach of the Min Code:
2
49
111
The international agreements committee has found that the Rwanda treaty will not make Rwanda safe in ‘short to medium term’ and should *not be ratified by Parliament* until the arrangements have ‘been fully implemented’.
1
55
110
(5) Not only is the power v wide, but it is not accompanied by rights of natural justice. The law used to state that *before* anyone could be deprived of British citizenship they had to be told the grounds and could ask for an ‘inquiry’. That has also gone.
1
13
108
If it helps to say I fully agree: I do. We are very fortunate that
@michaelpforan
is in the legal academy, he’s exceptional.
I very much concur with this. And in any event, we would do better to focus on criticising arguments, not people or their credentials. If one thing is common to universities and legal practice, it is surely this.
7
39
358
2
10
106
This is the case even if the individual does not know they have such an entitlement, has never exercised it or even been to the country in question or spk the language— which is v. common - even if the law of that country is unclear (also v common) and even if the Gov
2
8
107
(1) It sits with an even - yes even - number of Judges (two Senates of 8). The idea is that more than a bare majority is required to rule any law unconstitutional.
3
6
108
DoC is also not ‘deeming’ a person not to be a citizen. It’s the real deal: their citizenship is taken away even if they were a born UK citizen.
1
13
107
A constitutional issue of real contemporary interest concerning the right to protest ignited last week in an unexpected place— a report of the HL secondary legislation scrutiny committee.
2
52
106
And it is difficult to understand why 6 friends from 6 different households can meet in the pub but lunch between 2 households of 4 is a criminal offence.
1
12
104
The PM is the guardian of the Code. But the constitutional dilema that’s arisen is that the PM has been stuck with a FPN too for the same type of offence (maybe even at the same party) 3/….
2
21
103
I waited with anticipation to see the green list countries announced, as I’m sure you did. That is, countries where there is no greater risk from covid than the UK and there’ll be no travel quarantine.
12 countries on thie list, I read ! Bring on the holiday ....
6
37
104
Yet the Times pulled an important story at the request of No 10 which request had no force or basis in law. Why resist independent regulation if you are going to accede to requests from Gov to pull stories? (we don’t know of course what persuaded the Times to do so)
1
21
101
Not a breach of the law, but another stinging resignation letter was sent by one of the PM’s closest and longest serving advisers, Munira Mirza in February :
1
29
103
All of this gives rise to an unsatisfactory situation.
- Resentment from people who comply with the law against those who do not.
- Uncertainty as to one's moral obligations.
- The authority of the law being questioned and respect for the law being eroded.
3
12
101
Interestingly, Johnson was asked by the Committee about just such a possible conflict and how he would address it. His answer was that issues under the Code - including relating to himself - would be raised by Lord Geidt the ind adviser on Min interests … 5/…
2
22
98
‘Boris Johnson ready to curb the scope and power of judicial reviews.’ Just imagine what our press would be saying about this if it was happening in Poland, China or Venezuela (etc). Particularly depressing as the cases cited empowered Parl over the Gov.
1
46
98
(2) The power cannot be exercised if it would leave a person stateless. But this has been interpreted in a way very favourable to the government (but in line with international law) to mean de jure stateless, a person who is not a citizen *under the law* of another state…
1
11
99
That’s a conflict. And the conflict is even more pronounced because, as the PM accepted in evidence to the Liaison Committee in Nov last year, he is *also* bound by the Code 4/….
1
18
96
(3) The power used to be narrower, limited to people obtaining citizenship by fraud or acts of disloyalty, but this was broadened under the Lab Gov after 9/11 to allow the Home Secretary to deprive a person of citizenship when they consider it ‘conducive to the public good’.
3
11
97
Consider the stats:
- between 1973 and 2002 there were *no* DoCs;
- between 2010 and 2022 there were 217 DoCs on conducive to the public good grounds.
4
16
97
The Judicial Review and Courts Bill has been greeted with sighs of relief. Even called a damp squib.
It certainly doesn’t significantly restrict judicial review, as many feared.
But it is wrong to think that it is just a tweak to the law on quashing orders.
Why ? …
2
44
95
This means that if it can be shown that the law of eg Bangladesh, Egypt, Ireland, Israel (or anywhere) grants the person citizenship status through a family link, DoC does not leave them stateless.
2
8
96
A thread on the gov panel set up to reform judicial power to review gov action in the UK, details of which here:
1
65
95
The removal of the suspensive effect meant British citizens who are legally dual nationals can be marooned. The legislative history indicates that Parliament did not appreciate the major significance of this change in the law, but had a transformative effect on the power.
2
10
96
(ii) repudiating the ECHR would not be sufficient to free the UK from the Court’s interpretation of the ECHR as it owes analogous obligations under other treaties.
2
21
94
And today’s events shed light on an interesting constitutional issue under the Min Code, namely the problem of conflicts of interest, explored in this 🧵 [end]
5
11
92
I’m also confused after Boris’ speech: (1) going to work when you can’t work from home was already the position but now you should avoid public transport: that’s an additional rule not a relaxation; and [Thread]
Unclear statement from PM. Poses difficulty for millions of employees as to whether they should go to work, and how they get there. Who is the arbiter? If it’s the criminal law which determines it, has to be courts.
12
51
165
2
42
91
The ‘scale, context and nature of the breaches’ of the law mean it would ‘inconsistent with the rule of law for that conduct to pass with impunity’ he wrote:
1
16
93
of that country does not recognise the person as a citizen of their country (again, often happens). The UK courts decide if the law of the other country means the individual is a dual national and if they think, on balance, it does, then the DoC does not leave them stateless.
6
8
92
The Gov says that it exercises this power not as a punishment but by reference to the present risk the person poses to national security. Indeed if punishment played a part in the decision that would be an improper consideration. It is not supposed to be a penal power.
1
8
91
Thanks for the supportive tweets. It’s particularly pleasing to have been awarded this with Jude Bunting
@DoughtyStPublic
my brilliant junior on cases like Gedi and Jalloh (in the early days): well done Jude!
We are delighted to announce the winners of the Human Rights and Public Law awards are Juniors, Jude Bunting from
@DoughtyStreet
Silks, Tom Hickman QC from
@BlackstoneChbrs
and the Sets goes to Blackstone Chambers. Congratulations to our winners.
#chambersukbarawards2020
1
5
45
7
7
88
Under the present law, a person has no right to prior warning of a DoC decision or a right to provide their version of events before it is made. They can do so only after the event, on an appeal.
1
8
91
For anyone interested my thoughts in a working paper are here :
7
18
85
He was responsible for marshalling the Internal Markets Bill through the Lords but could not find any respectable legal arguments to defend its departure from UK obligations under international law:
1
18
90