Maggie Chapman MSP slanders Supreme Court

[Seriestwo]

Maggie Chapman has publicly accused the Supreme Court of transphobia. Any lawyers know if this is contempt of court?
x.com/gussiegrips/status/1914276708951171451?s=46

Whaaaaat?!!!

This makes no sense, how can you be allowed to vote for yourself?

Ffs what a joke our parliament is.

Well, you can vote for yourself in elections too. You can vote for yourself to be the next pope even*

*assuming you're part of the conclave!

No I can't.

Because I'm a) not catholic b) not a cardinal c) not a man

You can see why I edited my post! 😀

ArabellaScott · Today 07:25

Really?! Holy moly.

Yes, but it should have read 10%...

Fiona Onasanya, former Labour MP for Peterborough was removed thusly.

I'm not sure I can keep watching this. You'd think all of her constituents are trans and none of them are women at all.

Ahh but you haven't tested their chromosomes now have you! It's very possible that Personperson thinks all those birth givers have any number of "intersex" conditions 🙄

A correction - seems the Labour MSP Paul Kane did in fact vote in favour of removing Chapman.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/snp-politicians-back-anti-gender-ruling-green-msp/

But the SNP MSPs plus Maggie voted to keep her part of the gang.

https://x.com/ginadavidsonlbc/status/1917111628698423385

Here's Swinney, demonstrating his decisive commitment to upholding the independence of the judiciary.

'... he hadn’t spoken to those MSPs and did not direct how committee members vote'

Oh, interesting.

Standing Orders show Chapman should not have participated in the vote.

https://www.parliament.scot/about/how-parliament-works/parliament-rules-and-guidance/standing-orders/chapter-12-committee-procedures

https://x.com/WingsScotland/status/1917167240144716138

Ash Regan has reported Chapman to the Standards Committee. Good.

https://x.com/AshReganMSP/status/1914649126865641960

So they'll have to vote again? What happens if it's 50-50?

I don't think they'll vote again, (if they did, and it was a draw, the chair, i.e. Karen Adams would have casting vote, as far as I can tell. Adams is about as batshit as Chapman). but it'll be interesting to see what happens with the Standards Committee, which has 5 members - 2 SNP, 2 Tories, 1 Labour.

Only one of those - the unbelievably awful Emma Roddick - is likely to vote in favour of Chapman remaining in post.

www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/committees/current-and-previous-committees/session-6-standards-procedures-and-public-appointments-committee

I have used "Write to them" three times to express unhappiness about Scotgov reaction to SC ruling. Not even the courtesy of an acknowledgement from most

For completeness, here's another Spectator article on the Personpeeps saga

https://archive.ph/1tYiJ

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-maggie-chapman-saga-is-a-new-low-for-the-scottish-parliament/

From the above article:

The fight might not be over. I understand the Scottish Tories are looking at any procedural moves that could put the matter before the whole parliament, forcing every MSP to take a stance on the record.

Oh. Ohhhhhh. Ohhhhhhhhhh. Please PLEASE make this happen!

Also

MSPs have voted along ideological lines to say that no committee convenor or deputy convenor can be removed for speech made outwith that capacity. The libertarian in me takes some grudging comfort in that but I suspect Chapman’s supporters will come to regret the precedent they have set. This is a parliament which, if the polls are correct, will soon contain a number of Reform MSPs, a category of politician not known for shying away from incendiary comments. No doubt they would find a rationale for punishing an opponent as readily as they found one for excusing a mate, but that would be one more example of a broken, capricious, dishonourable parliament.

Reform in Scotland?!

Reform in Scotland?!

There’s an article about this on Scottish elections ac.uk (usual URL) from March. Is it the scunner factor? Reform UK in Scotland

Reform are on course to have third or fourth largest vote share In Scotland in 2026 according to many polls. Which means they will get MSPs.

There's an anti-EU constituency in Scotland just as in England, but it has been masked by the constitutional question. Arguably a lot of Scots voted to stay in the EU not because they wanted to stay in the EU but because they thought it would get them a second independence referendum.

With all Scottish political parties having shown themselves to be useless idiots, I can see Reform getting a significant vote.

People often forget that Leave got 38% of the vote in Scotland, including a big chunk of SNP voters. To listen to Sturgeon talk after the referendum, you'd think Scotland voted 99% Remain. That was probably an early sign that she wasn't as nimble as she'd been made out to be.

And there's also, let's be honest, always been an element of the SNP base that's attitudinally quite similar to UKIP types south of the border.

This isn't over. Lots of coverage of the result. Going to be brought up again:

Maggie Chapman saved by the SNP from committee axe despite 'disgraceful' Supreme Court comments
https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/maggie-chapman-saved-holyrood-committee-35136625

The dean of the Faculty of Advocates blasted the decision. Roddy Dunlop KC told the Herald: "We are unclear as to how a Committee whose remit is to consider equality and civil justice can credibly claim to be able fulfil that remit in circumstances where its Deputy Convenor has accused the Supreme Court of bigotry, prejudice and hatred; where rather than retracting and apologising therefor she has doubled down on the issue; and where the Convenor has declined to say anything publicly. What confidence can the public or the legal profession have in that Committee in such circumstances?
"For the avoidance of doubt, the Office Bearers recognise the right of Ms Chapman MSP, in common with all members of society, to make robust criticism of the judgment itself, and to call for changes to the law in light of the ruling and its consequences. What is not acceptable, however, is attacks on the integrity of the Court itself, or its Justices. That this has not been acknowledged save by those Members of the Committee who supported Ms White MSP’s motion is both surprising and regrettable.”

Back the day the SNP were known as the 'Tartan Tories'. The party has rebranded now as progressive lefties, but that is an oversimplification of the membership's views.

The absolute paucity of skilled politicians is starting to tell, I think. It's a shame, because a Scottish parliament seems like it could do a lot of good.

So far, though, failing to properly uphold processes and principles is making it look like they're just playing around with a pretendy parliament. A very, very expensive one. We pay these people a bloody fortune to vote themselves innocent and fanny about with daft policies like the Deposit return scheme, the Named Person scheme, the football 'offensive behaviour' bill, the GRR bill.

Just footering and posturing, which is bad enough, but when you think about how much they've been paid to bring in and oversee that series of gargantuan fuck ups, it's galling to say the least. Especially when everyone else is seeing their services and communities damaged irreperably by cuts and costs.

How's our infrastructure looking? How's education? Health? Instead of experienced, professional, thoughtful legislators working to ensure the country does well, we have people like Maggie Chapman taking around 80k a year to tell us that the Supreme court is 'bigoted' because it won't agree to let her pal Sophie Molly do whatever he wants.

What is not acceptable, however, is attacks on the integrity of the Court itself, or its Justices.

It's scunnering that Chapman can't discern the difference between criticising the SC judgement outcome and her inflammatory attack on the motivations of the judges. She just can't get beyond her intense tribalism, I think. It's actually quite frightening.

I don't think she is stupid, and I don't think she is mad. If a moderately intelligent, qualified person can become this blinkered and incapable of reason, it demonstrates how ordinary people can end up doing terrible things. Because they have become so soaked in extremist thinking they are lost to any kind of reciprocal discussion, criticism, or counterpoints.

She demonstrates an utter inability to listen, to consider, to reflect. I suppose that's what's scary.

It is. It's one thing being disappointed that the law hasn't gone your way, it's quite another blaming the people who are explaining the law.

I can't even think of the word for it. The lack of comprehension is so startling. .

The word you are looking for is immaturity.

MC is acting in a politically immature fashion.