To Break the Fourth Wall: A Comparative Approach to Scottish Ministers, Petitioners

Abstract

The decision of the Secretary of state for Scotland to use a section 35 order to 'veto' the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill was met with controversy. In some quarters, it was considered a necessary means of prevening the Scottish Parliament from interfering with UK-wide equality law. In others, it was branded as an unacceptable intrustion on the devolved law-making competences of the Scottish Parliament. This article will examine the situation across the pond and invoke the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the United States in order to conclude that there is nothing unusual, or even sinister about the use of section 35 in this instance.