What does the Rwanda policy court ruling mean for the government?

Aside from its moral shortcomings, the Rwanda plan was not enough to fix the problem, says Sean O’Grady

Britain’s government insists Rwanda is ‘less attractive’ than the UK but safe for deportees ... but the Supreme Court will decide (PA) (PA Archive)

Judges at the Supreme Court ruled that the government’s Rwanda plan is unlawful. The policy has been under legal review for about 18 months, and has made its way to the highest court in the land because of its political and legal significance. In the meantime, no removals to Rwanda have been carried out.

The first deportation of asylum seekers, planned for June 2022, was halted at the last minute by lawyers acting for the refugees and on behalf of the United Nations High Commission for  Refugees, who cited a breach of human rights. The deportation was then referred to the High Court where it was ruled to be in order. The case then went to the Court of Appeal, which in June 2023 overturned that decision by a majority vote. The case was further appealed to the Supreme Court.

What happens now that the government has lost?