Thread possibly of interest to: @wbuadvice.bsky.social; @lukepiper.bsky.social; @lisaocarroll.bsky.social; @patrickjbutler.bsky.social; @danielwincott.bsky.social; @eudelegationuk.bsky.social.

Thread possibly of interest to: @the3million.bsky.social; @neweuropeansuk.bsky.social; @jdportes.bsky.social; @freemovement.bsky.social; @colinyeo.bsky.social; @cbarnard.bsky.social; @akulith.bsky.social; @tamarahervey.bsky.social; @workrights.bsky.social; @rightsnet.org.uk; @nawra.bsky.social;

See here: *Side-stepping international law on the sly: The secret severing of the EU Settlement Scheme from the Withdrawal Agreement*
plus.lexis.com/api/permalin...

Please contact us if you do not have access to the journal and would like to read it!

– which was the very reason given for requiring all EU citizens (and their family members) to register in the first place.

This is a Windrush II scandal in the making. But it is eminently avoidable should the current government take some simple steps now to recognise EUSS status as conferring a Withdrawal Agreement residence right...

This affects all 6 million + EUSS status holders, denying them evidence of core Withdrawal Agreement rights. They therefore have no international legal protections against any future immigrant-hostile government stripping rights from people with EUSS status.

In an effort to prevent a small group of people with 'pre-settled status' from temporarily claiming benefits, the government is now arguing that the EUSS is not evidence of Withdrawal Agreement residence status.

@awelsh.bsky.social and I have a new article out in the Journal of Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Law, official journal of the Immigration Law Practitioners' Association, exploring how (& asking why?) the UK government persists in undermining EU citizens’ long term Withdrawal Agreement rights.

This is a bizarre tale in which an overreaction to one, apparently unintended, minor, consequence has blown away any supposed security and certainty of the new regime. And results in 'maximum cake' - a scheme that is constitutive when it suits the UK government, and declaratory when it doesn't.

We are delighted to share Conor Gearty @lselaw.bsky.social’s reflections on writing: 8 tips for surviving (and enjoying!) academic writing.

Many thanks to Conor for sharing his insights!

Article: doi.org/10.53386/nil...

Series: doi.org/10.53386/nil...

Possible interest to: @lauralundy.bsky.social @bruceadamson.bsky.social @martinoneill.bsky.social @awelsh.bsky.social @sparkerworld.bsky.social @mckeevergrainne.bsky.social

This highlights important, often unexpected, connections, between advice-based research, real lives, and policy. Report at: lnkd.in/gem4_zxG

Poss interest to @wbuadvice.bsky.social @nawra.bsky.social @uoy-yorklawschool.bsky.social @ruthpatrick0.bsky.social @jedmeers.bsky.social @rightsnet.org.uk

Another gap I commented on is the absence of backdating. Here, SCoSS have quoted my *evidence, drawn from advice-based research*, on periods when the risks of frictional poverty are higher - the immediate aftermath of childbirth being one.

In my evidence I noted that this means that the families in Scotland who miss out will almost certainly be working families.