Today's court ruling on the prorogation of parliament also implicates the Queen. That's according to the anti-monarchy campaign Republic.

Speaking in response to the ruling the group's CEO Graham Smith earlier:

"The court ruled that not only was the advice unlawful but so was the prorogation. If the appeal next week upholds this view then the Queen prorogued parliament unlawfully."

"It's not enough to say she was following orders, that's no defence. The Queen has enough discretion within the constitution to refuse to act on the PM's instructions against parliament's wishes."

"The Queen has chosen to abdicate all responsibility, if not the throne. It leaves Britain with a pointless head of state when a crisis such as this needs an effective one."

"This crisis has shown very clearly that we need a democratic alternative to the monarchy: an effective head of state who can play a meangingful constitutional role."

Republic tweeted earlier:

"If it’s right that the Queen had no choice in the matter of prorogation, the only conclusion to draw is that she is constitutionally bound to commit unconstitutional and unlawful acts when told to do so. She had the power and free will to refuse such action." @RepublicStaff