Sky Views: Can the judges do justice to Brexit?
Tuesday 6 December 2016 16:30, UK
Michelle Clifford, Senior News Correspondent
The question 11 Supreme Court justices are being asked to consider this week is "can the Government trigger Brexit without a vote in parliament?"
The question many court watchers are considering about the 11 judges is "can the justices put their own political views on Brexit to one side?"
It's a fact that we all have opinions. It's likely - even probable - that the judges voted in the EU referendum.
Does that mean they can't view the law with an objective eye? Will they, as one protester told me outside the court, "be bloody guided by their prejudices" (the inference being they are left-leaning and will err against the Government).
Lady Hale - the deputy of the court - didn't help things recently with a speech where she raised concerns about the amount of legislation that would need to be replaced if the Government loses its appeal.
It was a point for discussion posited by one of the most experienced judges in the country but the timing was off and created a perception of bias in the minds of many.
Would we worry a pro-EU doctor would try less hard for a pro-Brexit patient?
The president of the court Lord Neuberger faced calls to stand aside from the Government appeal because his wife tweeted her concerns about Brexit.
Yes, not him, his wife. But again, perception. And perception matters.
Constitutional law expert Professor Vernon Bogdanor says it is important that Supreme Court judges betray as little of their political affiliation as possible.
He said: "Whatever decision the judges make there are going to be some people who are annoyed and some will say they are pro-euro stooges, some may say the opposite.
"I am very concerned that judges shouldn't be associated with any political position (like they are in the USA) which I think won't be helpful"
But why do we find it so hard to believe that these judges, these seasoned professionals with years behind them in the courts, cannot act impartially?
Would we worry a pro-EU doctor would try less hard for a pro-Brexit patient? Would their "political bias" affect their work?
I once asked a surgeon while I was going under for a life-saving treatment if he went "that bit extra" for patients he liked. He replied "No" (which was rather disappointing as we were getting on famously).
Part of being a "professional" is the ability to act objectively. And I've seen enough judges guiding jurors on how to establish guilt or innocence when the defendant is clearly a wrong 'un to know it is possible.
The Supreme Court is not criminal court, but the principles are the same.
Act and judge in accordance with the law of the land. And do everything you can to preserve the principle of impartiality.
When I think of it, being a justice has a lot in common with being a journalist.
Sky Views is a series of comment pieces by Paste BN editors and correspondents, published every morning.
Previously on Sky Views: Ed Conway: Britain needs an annual tax on homes