The Supreme Court's Renewed Interest in Autochthonous Constitutionalism

Four recent cases point to a subtle yet significant shift in the UK Supreme Court’s approach to the relationship between the UK Constitution and European law. In them, a number of judges make comments signalling their intention to provide greater protection for longstanding domestic constitutional principles from the encroachment of European law and to place less reliance on European law to resolve controversies before the courts. In short, they indicate a renewed interest in autochthonous constitutionalism — that is, asserting the primacy, relevance and sufficiency of the UK Constitution.

These cases demonstrate a short-term alignment with the interests of the political arms of government, dovetailing with the growing Euroscepticism expressed by members of the Conservative Party and UKIP. However, I argue that there is also an important long-term dimension to these decisions that is less favourable to the political calss. The principles set out in these cases lay the groundwork for the judiciary to exercise a more robust form of oversight over Parliament's lawmaking activities. They bolster the judiciary's role in defining the constitutional framework in which Parliament operates and expand the set of fundamental rights against which Parliament's activities will be construed.