New and Notable Titles: A selection of recent publications relating to parliamentary studies prepared with the assistance of the Library of Parliament (September 2019--November 2019).

• Position: Publications

"Fighting talk--The threat to MPs from the public is greater than ever." Economist 433 (9163), October 5, 2019.

* Women and ethnic-minority MPs suffer the worst abuse.

Bercow, John. "Rules of behaviour and courtesies in the House of Commons." House of Commons--Issued by the Speaker and the Deputy Speakers, November 2019:18p.

* This pamphlet has been agreed by the Speaker and the Deputy Speakers and is intended to help Members, particularly those new to the House, in understanding the behaviour expected in the Chamber of the House of Commons and in Westminster Hall. While open to change, these rules are important in maintaining the good order of proceedings and the civility of debate--so that all Members are able to participate and be heard with respect.

Feldman, Charlie. "Beyond Charter statements: Constitutional communications in the parliamentary context." Journal of Parliamentary and Political Law / Revue de droit parlementaire et politique--Special Issue --Canada's Constitutional & Governance Challenges After 150 Years / numero hors-serie--Les Defis Constitutionnels et de Gouvernance du Canada Apres 150 ans, 2018 : 37-66.

* The parliamentary record is replete with historical and contemporary expressions of concern by federal legislators regarding the constitutionality of proposed enactments. Yet, little research appears to explore how parliamentarians' constitutional knowledge is developed--both generally and in relation to specific enactments--within the parliamentary context.

Finnis, John. "The unconstitutionality of the Supreme Court's prorogation judgment." Policy Exchange, September 28, 2019: 22p.

* The Supreme Court's judgment in Miller/ Cherry [2019] UKSC 41 holds that Parliamentary sovereignty needs to be judicially protected against the power of the Government to prorogue Parliament. But the Judgment itself undercuts the genuine sovereignty of Parliament by evading a statutory prohibition--art. 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689--on judicial questioning of proceedings in Parliament. This paper shows that the Judgment was wholly unjustified by law. It wrongly transfers the conventions about prorogation into the domain of justiciable law. The Judgment is an inept foray into high politics and should be recognised as a historic mistake, not a victory for fundamental principle.

Jenkin, Bernard. "The role of the Speaker is changing." The House Magazine. 1665 (42), October 28, 2019: 22-3.

* Speakers now have to consider the impact of their...