Lawyers for Borders

32 posts

Lawyers for Borders banner
Lawyers for Borders

Lawyers for Borders

@LawForBorders

Cross-party movement to end asylum hotels and secure our borders. DM for pro bono assistance or to support our campaign.

Katılım Ağustos 2025
10 Takip Edilen6.8K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Lawyers for Borders
Lawyers for Borders@LawForBorders·
Lawyers for Borders is a cross-party movement, bringing together lawyers who believe in securing our borders and ending illegal migration. Our first campaign is helping patriotic councils and communities to resist asylum hotels. If you need help or are a lawyer, get in touch.
English
106
1.5K
5.8K
241.1K
Lawyers for Borders retweetledi
Lawyers for Borders
Lawyers for Borders@LawForBorders·
On Friday, the Court only published a summary of their judgment in Epping Forest District Council v Somani Hotels Ltd. The full judgment is available now 👇 judiciary.uk/wp-content/upl…
Lawyers for Borders@LawForBorders

The question of shutting down the Bell Hotel for asylum use will soon be reconsidered in October with a full trial. @EppingTories and @eppingforestdc our team of legal volunteers are on hand and willing to support in any way we can. Our DMs are open.

English
2
16
44
3.1K
Lawyers for Borders
Lawyers for Borders@LawForBorders·
Judge Hirst was both poacher and gamekeeper. The public rightly has no confidence in a system where those who spend their day jobs fighting to keep foreign criminals here then climb onto the bench and block deportations.
Robert Jenrick@RobertJenrick

The judge in this case also previously challenged the Rwanda deportation scheme and helped end a fast-track deportation scheme. 🧵A thread on yet another judge with remarkable similarity between their background and decisions👇 We need radical overhaul.

English
7
110
265
6K
Lawyers for Borders
Lawyers for Borders@LawForBorders·
The question of shutting down the Bell Hotel for asylum use will soon be reconsidered in October with a full trial. @EppingTories and @eppingforestdc our team of legal volunteers are on hand and willing to support in any way we can. Our DMs are open.
Lawyers for Borders@LawForBorders

This is a fact-specific loss, not a green light for asylum hotels. Councils still have tools: - Targeted s.187B injunctions with stronger evidence; and – s.183 stop notices where the use is recent. Reach out for support, we’ll triage your case.

English
13
248
779
25.1K
Lawyers for Borders
Lawyers for Borders@LawForBorders·
Still trying to wrap our heads around how scrapping the injunction reduces protests. If closing the hotel “incentivises” protests, what do you think keeping it open does? Make it make sense.
Lawyers for Borders tweet media
English
42
213
862
32.9K
Lawyers for Borders
Lawyers for Borders@LawForBorders·
This is a fact-specific loss, not a green light for asylum hotels. Councils still have tools: - Targeted s.187B injunctions with stronger evidence; and – s.183 stop notices where the use is recent. Reach out for support, we’ll triage your case.
Robert Jenrick@RobertJenrick

This is an extremely disappointing decision. Yvette Cooper used taxpayer money - your money - to keep open a hotel housing illegal migrants. The Government’s lawyers argued accommodating illegal migrants was in the “national interest”. In court they said the right of illegal migrants to free hotels is more important than the rights of the British people. Well, they are not. The British Government should always put the interests of the British people first. Starmer’s Government has shown itself to be on the side of illegal migrants who have broken into our county. But this is not a free pass for asylum hotels. Councils can and should still act to close hotels. If they don’t, residents will rightly ask, on whose side are they? My team and @LawForBorders will continue to provide legal assistance to help protect communities. There is no acceptable accommodation for illegal migrants. The Government should be prioritising Brits in need and deporting every illegal migrant, as the last Government should have done and I've argued for years.

English
21
317
851
36.6K
Lawyers for Borders
Lawyers for Borders@LawForBorders·
So the key questions for the Court are: • When should the SoS be joined/intervene in 187B hotel cases? • How far may a judge factor relative planning merits into the balance of convenience? • Can protest-related impacts be part of the “planning harm” matrix?
English
2
5
29
1.1K
Lawyers for Borders
Lawyers for Borders@LawForBorders·
Epping Forest DC’s submissions:   Material change of use from C1 hotel to hostel/sui generis is strongly arguable. Circumstances changed mid-2025 (community impact), making injunction necessary pending a speedy final hearing.   The judge was entitled to grant interim relief.
English
1
4
25
1.2K
Lawyers for Borders
Lawyers for Borders@LawForBorders·
Yesterday, the Home Office and Somani Hotels challenged the interim planning injunction that stopped use of the Bell Hotel for asylum accommodation (TCPA s.187B).   A reasoned judgment is expected today at 2pm, here’s a summary of the case and the parties submissions 👇
English
11
60
256
7.8K