An Albanian criminal was allowed to stay in Britain partly because his son will not eat foreign chicken nuggets, The Telegraph can reveal.
An immigration tribunal ruled that it would be “unduly harsh” for the 10-year-old boy to be forced to move to Albania with his father owing to his sensitivity around food.
The sole example provided to the court was his distaste for the “type of chicken nuggets that are available abroad”.
As a result, the judge allowed the father’s appeal against deportation as a breach of his right to a family life under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), citing the impact his removal might have on his son.
Of course, judges are supposed to be on the law’s side, not our. But still.
Now, anyone who actually knows about the law (which is different from knowing the law) is welcome to correct me. But judges are selected from serving lawyers. You do your lawyering, you become a KC, if you want to go the judge route you do a bit of deputy recordering and so on.
They don’t have to be these days but more normally from barristers than solicitors.
And here’s the thing. Clearly, a judge who specialises in Admiralty law will be selected from among those barristers who do Admiralty law. Etc etc. Which means that judges on these immigration cases are going to be from places like Matrix Chambers. The home and haunt of very idiot lefties with very extreme views on thigs like ‘uman rights and migration etc.
*Because* we have “progressive” chambers which specialise in certain areas of the law *therefore* we’re getting, in certain areas, progressive judges.
I suggest this might not be optimal.