Laurène Soubise

And yet still infuriating. It feels as if crucial research doesn't take place north of Birmingham

1 in 3 doctors were born overseas.

1 in 2 builders were born overseas.

1 in 6 nurses were born overseas.

1 in 4 transport workers were born overseas.

1 in 7 UK business founders were born overseas.

1 in 5 university academics were born overseas.

The UK would be screwed without them.

Do you want to work with a fabulous feminist team as book review editor? Then get in touch at the link below! @sharronfitz.bsky.social admin@lexnetwork.org
@uccwomenstudies.bsky.social
@ruthholliday.bsky.social @umuterel.bsky.social @imogentyler.bsky.social @lindaconnolly.bsky.social

One of these days a senior politician will actually say something positive about the 10 million people living and working in the UK who happen to have been born abroad, but that day is not today

To go on about how jobs and houses and shops and drugs might now be consumed by someone other than yourself is, to be frank, a form of greed. Stop going on about yourself and your people and your family for a minute and think about others.

We are delighted to share the inaugural edition of our brand new CCJS newsletter. Every quarter we will be sharing the latest research developments, impact activities, events and other news from across our community. Read the first edition here: campaignmonitor.leeds.ac.uk/t/y-e-cuidyo...

‘Lefty lawyer’ Keir Starmer to push for ECHR reform The U.K. prime minister — a former human rights lawyer — wants to shake up Strasbourg amid pressure over migration rulings. Some fear inaction will stoke “the next Brexit.”

Un Premier ministre « avocat gauchiste » veut une réécriture de la CEDH.

Pour saper la protection des étrangers en matière d'éloignement (tortures & vie familiale).

Afin de « calmer » l'extrême droite.

Le dernier qui a tenté ce calcul, c'est Cameron en 2015.

Le résultat fut brillant : Brexit...

Migrants: «4000» forces de l’ordre mobilisées pour des contrôles dans les gares et bus, annonce

Ça porte un nom, qui renvoie à une tradition française déjà ancienne: c'est une rafle.

V good paper by @echrhawk.bsky.social - 'The Human Rights Act under Siege: The Vulnerability of Fundamental Rights Protection under the UK Constitution' - reflecting on implications of legislation passed in 'dying days' of last govt. A sobering conclusion. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

“Whilst this may involve a degree of disruption in family life this is considered to be proportionate to the legitimate aim of maintaining effective immigration control.”

It also states that the need to maintain immigration control “outweighs the possible effect on you”

But sure,let's review art 8

Really nasty stuff!

That's great for them - now can we also raise the statutory level for everyone else?

If you would like to come to our conference "25 years of the HRA" on 18 September you can get tickets here - www.tickettailor.com/events/schoo...

📢 Out today! Our article in Law & Society Review on #CauseLawyers in #Cambodia, exploring lawyers' strategies of #Closeting under #Authoritarianism: co-authored with @kieranmcevoy.bsky.social for @lawandsociety.bsky.social. Open access, too!
🔗 www.cambridge.org/core/journal...

Something that the Lucy Connolly case has illustrated - something that is well known to those who work in criminal justice but often overlooked in public debate - is the complexity and nuance in the lives and characters of people appearing before the courts.

A short 🧵👇

Forcing women to hand over a specific ID if they don't conform to gender stereotypes, what a victory

Such an excellent idea that it doesn't work for those of us whose birth certificate isn't in English. But i guess i could now be required to carry an official translation of my birth certificate! 🤦‍♀️

I’m belatedly reading the white paper. Lots to say but one thing really bugging me is the stuff on “abuse” of student routes and the proposed solution. The “abuse” is actually people following rules. So tightening the visa refusal, enrolment and completion thresholds for universities is irrelevant.

Fascinating thread.

This is something i have noticed too and it also works for benefit claimants and probably other topics

The University of Leeds, School of Law: Dr Paolo Sandro, Dr Stuart Wallace, Dr James Greenwood-Reeves, and Rebecca Moosavian – Written Evidence (ROL0048) Executive Summary 1. The rule of law is a legal and political ideal of universal appeal. In a nutshell, it prohibits arbitrary government. 2. Debates about whether it is a formal or substantive ideal are partially misguided, for already in a formal sense the rule of law makes demands as to the contents of laws: they should be general; prospective; clearly formulated; non-contradictory; and possible to obey. 3. Crucially, the rule of law is also an institutional ideal: it requires that a certain institutional framework is realised through which individuals can access an independent court to vindicate their rights. This represents the fundamental right of access to justice, which must be guaranteed by the state for all. Therefore, the single biggest threat to the rule of law in the UK is the inability of millions to access legal aid. 4. The rule of law is a fundamental tenet of the UK’s constitutional arrangements as a counterpart to parliamentary sovereignty, by requiring independent courts to interpret and apply the legislation made by Parliament. As such, it has also played the function exercised by codified constitutions in other countries against authoritarian rule. However, historical relevance should not leave us complacent: for the rule of law obtains only insofar as political actors feel compelled to comply with its demands. 5. In recent times, two legislative techniques which should be ‘exceptional’ have been more frequently used in Acts of Parliament: Henry VIII powers and ouster (or privative) clauses. Both are a direct affront to the rule of law – on any understanding, formal or substantive – and their use in legislation should

be reduced (or, at the very least, be subject to the strictest scrutiny in Parliament). 6. More generally, all legislation should be scrutinised more strictly for compatibility with the demands of the rule of law, so that something like the Illegal Migration Act 2023 – which violates the rule of law in more than one sense – will not occur again. The House of Lords should not feel that is constitutionally improper to reject draft legislation that clearly violates the rule of law. 7. Finally, the rule of law is not simply the concern of lawyers and cannot solely rely on the commitment of political and legal actors for its ongoing efficacy. Being partly a political ideal, its continuous operation ultimately relies on a shared collective consensus that the rule of law matters. Therefore, outside of formal state institutions, civic society can provide support in promoting the rule of law, through education, awareness-raising, and capacity-building. Additionally, social movements and activist groups might use protest as a means of redress. This becomes of particular importance when institutional means of upholding the rule of law are deemed to be failing. Crucially, however, due to the unpredictable nature of political protest movements, it is vital that the government be seen to uphold the rule of law consistently in the first instance, to avoid the risk of widespread public disorder.

With my wonderful @lsjleeds.bsky.social colleagues @echrhawk.bsky.social, @jgreenwoodreeves.bsky.social & Rebecca Moosavian we have submitted evidence to the House of Lords' Constitution Committee inquiry. Executive summary attached below (with alt-text)

committees.parliament.uk/writtenevide...

“But we don’t mean you”, some then always say.

So who do you mean?
The Black nurse who is actually British, but was picked out anyway as he’s Black?
The refugee from Afghanistan?
The Albanian doctor?

Who is it?

We have been at this point so many times before.

You are a "citizen of nowhere", they said.

A "queue-jumper", they said.

Now I am a "squalid chapter", they say.

A risk as I might make this an "island of strangers", they say.

I am "pulling the country apart", they say.

"We don't understand. We've tried everything; writing op-eds declaring the Far Right are bang on & repeating their slogans; giving speeches with all the Far Right buzz words & rhetoric; changing laws and policies to give effect to Far Right demands; and... STILL people want to vote Far Right??"

"oh but they don't mean you" - sure, yeah, because I have a job and I'm physically fit, yeah? what if I were to become one of those immigrants who has to be on the dole? what if I end up disabled for whatever reason? what if I end up having a ton of kids with another immigrant? what if? what if?

I will not sit down and be quiet in my privilege while you are being scapegoated and your contribution to this hostile country being erased.

LOVE TO BE PART OF A SQUALID CHAPTER

Absolutely this. Me, as well.

We invite signatures from UK law people for our open letter on the aftermath of FWS.

*Please sign and share with your networks* as we will send to the relevant parliamentary human rights bodies on closure of the letter.

I’ve written about the For Women Scotland judgment for the @ukcla.bsky.social blog - please take a look and share as you see fit!👇🏻