Every sentence of Iain Duncan Smith’s rant against the Supreme Court is probably false The former work and pensions minister Iain Duncan Smith has hit out at today’s Supreme Court Article 50 ruling against the […]

The former work and pensions minister Iain Duncan Smith has hit out at today’s Supreme Court Article 50 ruling against the government on the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire show.

Here is his full quote:

You’ve got to understand that, of course, there’s the European issue but there’s also the issue about who is supreme – Parliament or a self-appointed court. This is the issue here right now, so I was intrigued that it was a split judgment, I’m disappointed they’ve decided to tell Parliament how to run its business. i's opinion newsletter: talking points from today Email address is invalid Email address is invalid Thank you for subscribing! Sorry, there was a problem with your subscription. After all, there was a vote before in December overwhelmingly to trigger Article 50, so they’ve stepped into new territory where they’ve actually told Parliament not just that they should do something but actually what they should do and I think that leads further down the road to real constitutional issues about who is supreme in this role.

Legal expert and blogger The Secret Barrister has a bone or two to pick with his points.

1. Every sentence of this is provably false. It is Trump-like in its audacity. pic.twitter.com/eC3WwoAZBt — The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) January 24, 2017

2. There’s no issue about who is supreme between Parliament and Supreme Court. It’s Parliament. That is basic constitutional law. pic.twitter.com/Ls12PimYHX — The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) January 24, 2017

3. The Supreme Court is not self-appointed. It was established by Parliament by section 23 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. pic.twitter.com/6AY61inDyV — The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) January 24, 2017

4. There is nothing intriguing about dissenting opinions in Supreme Court (or House of Lords as was) judgments. Very common. pic.twitter.com/YF3krBTocB — The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) January 24, 2017

5. The Court expressly did not tell Parliament how to run its business. It clarified what the govt could not do unilaterally. pic.twitter.com/sQfYmp6yhH — The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) January 24, 2017

6. There is no new territory. Not even something that looks a little bit like new territory. As the judgment makes plain. pic.twitter.com/hs6wjSSSVc — The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) January 24, 2017

7. As IDS repeats his inarticulate point, I’ll repeat my rebuttal: Parliament has not been told what to do. Not in the slightest. pic.twitter.com/s1ZuNEBsI1 — The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) January 24, 2017