A new high court has begun proceedings in Britain, replacing theappeals court in the House of Lords. Its title, "The Supreme Court,"has led some British lawyers to be concerned that it might eventuallytake on powers like the American Supreme Court, which can strike downlaws. Its proponents saythe court is a healthy separation of the judiciary from thelegislature.

President of the new British Supreme Court, Lord Phillips (2nd L), stands with fellow justices outside the court where they were sworn in, 01 Oct 2009Eleven Supreme Court Justices were sworn in to the country's new highest court.

"I now invite your Lordship to take the oaths required of you by law."

Thenew court building is on London's Parliament Square, next toWestminster Abbey, and across from the Houses of Parliamentwhere the Law Lords Court used to be.

Senior lawyer Hugh Tomlinson says the move is important.
   
"Manypeople were confused in the old days between the House of Lords as acourt and the House of Lords as a legislative body and a new SupremeCourt will get over that confusion. It will symbolically reinforce theindependence of the judiciary, which I think is a very good thing," said Tomlinson.

Thecourt is promising open access, televising proceedings for the firsttime in British history. Another improvement says Tomlinson.

"Televisingproceedings is a very good idea ... for two reasons; first, it willenable people to see how seriously the cases are taken, how theargument is done, and secondly, it will lead to both the lawyers andthe judges perhaps expressing themselves in a clearer and more publicly accessible way," said Tomlinson.

But noteveryone thinks the invention of a Supreme Court for Britain is a wisedecision. Lord Neuberger, a former law lord, warned the creation ofthe court was meddling with Britain's constitution and could haveunforeseen consequences.

Lawyer Dan Tench says Neuberger is not the only one concerned.

"Whatpeople are particularly looking for is whether our highest court willnow take a more aggressive approach against parliament and against theexecutive and be more intervening in decisions," Tench said.

That would be like the American Supreme Court, and Tench says the British version will not end up that way.

"Ithink that is very unlikely. The British judiciary in many ways isvery set in its ways, and I think that the time honored customs of theBritish judiciary and its approach is unlikely to be Americanized," Tench said.

Its decisions will be widely watched, he says.

"Thedecisions from the highest court in the United Kingdom are extremelyinfluential around the world. They obviously have some influence inthe United States as the decisions of the United States Supreme Courthave are influential over here," Tench said.

Thecourt's first case involves human rights and terrorism. The casechallenges the British government's right to create laws without a votein Parliament. Six terrorism suspects have had their assets frozen,even though they have not been convicted of funding terrorism.