<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
  <title>Case Centre Right</title>
  <link>https://casecentreright.co.uk/</link>
  <description>Argument, evidence and the British constitution</description>
  <language>en</language>
  <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2026 22:40:15 GMT</lastBuildDate>
  <atom:link href="https://casecentreright.co.uk/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
  <item>
    <title>A Constitutional MOT for Every Bill: Why 2026 Needs Impact Testing Before Royal Assent</title>
    <link>https://casecentreright.co.uk/constitutional-mot-every-bill-impact-testing-2026/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://casecentreright.co.uk/constitutional-mot-every-bill-impact-testing-2026/</guid>
    <description>Ministers already publish fiscal and regulatory impact assessments. They should publish a short constitutional one too, covering rights, devolution, delegated powers and access to justice. This is a centre-right case for clarity in Parliament — and less guesswork in court.</description>
    <author>Case Centre Right</author>
    <category>Constitutional Affairs</category>
    <pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2026 20:59:14 GMT</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>Five Judgments That Frame the 2026 Constitution — and What They Actually Decide</title>
    <link>https://casecentreright.co.uk/five-judgments-2026-constitution-what-they-decide/</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">https://casecentreright.co.uk/five-judgments-2026-constitution-what-they-decide/</guid>
    <description>Entick, Anisminic, Miller, Miller and UNISON are invoked constantly in constitutional argument. Read closely, they are narrower — and more instructive — than the slogans suggest. Here is what each decides for 2026.</description>
    <author>Case Centre Right</author>
    <category>Law &amp; Courts</category>
    <pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2026 20:59:14 GMT</pubDate>
  </item>
</channel>
</rss>