the government wants the supreme courtjustices to - the supreme courtjustices to overturn the appeal to rwanda might end up in the country from which they fled, breaching their human rights under the european convention. this lawyer represents asylum seekers who originally challenged the lawfulness of the rwanda policy. the supreme court will be _ the rwanda policy. the supreme court will be considering - court will be considering whether rwanda is a safe third country and will consider a wealth of evidence including from the unhcr about fundamental deficiencies in the asylum system of what wonder. if the government wins ministers open the flights will take off for christmas. ii ministers open the flights will take off for christmas.- take off for christmas. if they lose it is thought _ take off for christmas. if they lose it is thought the - take off for christmas. if they lose it is thought the home i lose it is thought the home office will seek a new treaty with the rwandan government to take account of the concerns of the supreme courtjustices. but there are some in the conservat

will seek a new treaty with the rwandan government to take account of the concerns of the supreme courtjusticesn the conservative party who argue the real problem is the uk's commitment to the european convention on human rights. as foreign secretary, mr cleverly said he was not convinced the uk needed to leave the convention. as home secretary, will he still think the same tomorrow? mark easton, bbc news. let's go back to chris now. how big a deal is tomorrow? and where does today leave rishi sunak? tomorrow is a landmark day in the government of rishi sunak. why do i say that? because the rwanda plan is a benchmark, flagship policy that has been bogged down in the courts for ages and reaches its final moment, around ten o'clock tomorrow morning, and if the government wins, it would be a huge moment politically. psychologically, a reset after the trouble that rishi sunak has confronted. but the expectation within government is that they will probably lose, may even be quite a messy outcome, a qualified yes or a qualified no, and then there would be a row that would break out about what has hap

former supreme courtjustice jonathan sumption is scathing.l for governments to promote legislation to change the law after an unfavourable judgment in the courts. but i have never heard of them trying to change the facts by law. for as long as black isn't white, the business of passing acts of parliament to say that it is is profoundly discreditable. the prime minister is taking huge gambles to try and force his flagship policy through. can he convince the house of commons to vote rwanda is safe when the supreme court says it's not? can he get it through the house of lords? and how long will the whole process take? 0ne home office source asked today answered, "how long is a piece of string?" mark easton, bbc news. the other main story tonight. sir keir starmer has suffered a major rebellion over his stance on the israel—gaza war this evening, with 56 of his mps voting for an immediate ceasefire. ten mps, including eight shadow minsters, either resigned or were sacked from the shadow front bench after they backed an snp motion calling for a ce

in their ruling on wednesday, the supreme courtjustices said there were "substantial grounds" to believeountry to places where they would be unsafe. let's cross live to madeleine sumption, she is the director of the migration 0bservatory, at the university of oxford thank you for being with us. what did you make of the court ruling and the home secretary's decision to say that we can go ahead with this anyway and we are going to come up with a new treaty with rwanda to make it happen?— with a new treaty with rwanda to make it happen? obviously will have to see the details _ make it happen? obviously will have to see the details of _ make it happen? obviously will have to see the details of what _ make it happen? obviously will have to see the details of what the - to see the details of what the government is proposing. 0ne to see the details of what the government is proposing. one thing i think that was really interesting about the supreme courtjudgment was that it was quite comprehensive in crushing the idea that they thought rwanda could be a safe place for asylum seekers to be sent t

it's not the legal cases, is not all the chaos, it's the fact that donald trump put the supreme courtjusticesabortion for most women in this count. . ., country. have you noticed that, because he _ country. have you noticed that, because he doesn't _ country. have you noticed that, because he doesn't want - country. have you noticed that, because he doesn't want a - country. have you noticed that, . because he doesn't want a national abortion ban, donald trump will. he: has voiced that. he realises it's going to hurt him in the election so he's going to bring it back, now you have his supporters that are all for it. that's why the democrats will win the white house, the senate, and the house. again, close races because it's a close country, and evenly divided now, but women are going to come out in droves and they have in all of the special elections we've seen in ohio, in other states, in kansas, on this very topic. yet. in kansas, on this very topic. yet, --eole in kansas, on this very topic. yet, people should _ in kansas, on this very topic. yet, people should know— in kansas, on this ver

will seek a new treaty with the rwandan government to take account of the concerns of the supreme courtjusticese some in the conservative party who argue the real problem is the uk's commitment to the european convention on human rights. as foreign secretary, mr cleverly said he was not convinced the uk needed to leave the convention. as home secretary, will he still think the same later this morning? mark easton, bbc news. let's speak now to our chief political correspondent henry zeffman, who is at downing street this morning. whatever the court decides today there are big implications for the government?— there are big implications for the government? there are big implications for the covernment? ~' ., ., , government? like london buses, big olitical government? like london buses, big political days — government? like london buses, big political days in _ government? like london buses, big political days in westminster - government? like london buses, big political days in westminster seem . political days in westminster seem to come in threes. on monday we had the reshuffle and the extraor