A judiciary under fire?

October 2025 saw the most recent Conservative Party conference and, whilst being ridiculed for their poor turnout, it detailed new plans the party had for the future, notably from MP Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary. Whilst brandishing a judge's wig, Jenrick states that "We've got a problem" as he goes on to say how judges have been working with open borders charities and promoting this work on social media. Jenrick uses this idea, whilst promoting the Conservative Party's "Stronger economy Stronger borders" slogan, to then propose the notion of ministers having a greater say in appointing judges purely because those in the current positions do not align with the Party's own views.

Judicial independence is the idea that judges are free from governmental control and external opinion as their sole role is to make judgements based on the law at hand, yet the Conservative Party do not see how them wanting a say in their appointments is an obstruction to this? Jenrick asked "How independent are they?" But the greater question is how much of their independence will be lost if government intervention increases? The reason the Conservatives want a greater say in this is to ensure that those in these positions of power hold the same views as them, or even potentially feel bound to rule in line with their beliefs if they are appointed by that party. So rather than trying to restore judicial independence, the right is again aiming to restrict it further.

The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 was enforced by the Labour government to ensure judicial independence and the independent Judicial Appointments Committee was formed in April of 2006 to further formalise this process. The left has historically fought to maintain a separation of powers, so it comes to no surprise that the right has disagreed with this, although now more than ever this has become apparent.

The flaws in the Conservative's proposed system are not without clear evidence of failures as this mirrors the method used in the US, which is also favoured by the right there in the form of the Republican Party. Trump's first term saw 3 Supreme Court justice appointments which allowed the Conservative majority to be 6-3, this continued the right-wing legacy even into the Democrat Biden administration when these selected justices ruled for Roe v Wade to be overturned in 2022. This act of the right-wing party exercising control over the judiciary led to basic rights of vulnerable groups being stripped, which was solely enabled by party involvement allowing like-minded individuals to hold this position of authority. Having judges push party agenda holds deep issues with protecting the elite, rather than fulfilling their basic aim to use the law to protect the masses and the vulnerable in a society.

In the current age the US is characterised by division, protest and the rule of right-wing elites, why would imitating their judicial system then benefit Britain?

It has become increasingly clear in recent years that the right in the UK is striving to act more like the US in many ways. Shown through the rise of populism with right wing figures such as, leader of the Reform UK Party, Nigel Farage, using this as a basis to gain popularity, as well as through Farage's own efforts to have closer relations with the current Trump administration, involving himself with figures such as president Donald Trump himself and others such as Elon Musk. This relation has transcended into the same methods being used to win favour, such as with the demonisation of immigrants seen in both countries. Yet why should the UK follow the US?

In the current age the US is characterised by division, protest and the rule of right-wing elites, why would imitating their judicial system then benefit Britain? The answer lies in the fact that the Conservative Party is not pushing this idea of greater involvement in the judiciary to benefit the people, but rather to benefit themselves and push their own agenda at the expense of a fair and independent judicial system.

By Tavia Watson

Image: Peter Byrne/PA