Lincoln’s Inn ceremony to make Liz Truss an honorary bencher postponed indefinitely

By on

Was it something she didn’t say?


The Ministry of Justice has confirmed that the ceremony to make Lord Chancellor Liz Truss an honorary bencher of Lincoln’s Inn “has been postponed” and no new date has been arranged.

The news comes less than a fortnight after Truss failed to condemn tabloid newspaper attacks on the judiciary after their ruling that Brexit should be put before parliament — an omission that has seriously angered the legal profession.

Perhaps inevitably, the delay of the ceremony is being interpreted as a deliberate snub. Indeed, Daily Mail diarist Sebastian Shakespeare is claiming this morning that a source has told him just this, writing:

Lincoln’s Inn had a change of heart, I am told, about making her an honorary Bencher after some senior members — the so-called Benchers — protested that Truss didn’t do enough to stand up for the judiciary following this month’s controversial High Court ruling that Theresa May can only trigger the process for leaving the European Union via a vote in Parliament.

There is a convention to make all Lord Chancellors honorary benchers, which is a senior role conferred by the four Inns of Court — Lincoln’s Inn, Gray’s Inn, Inner Temple and Middle Temple — on senior legal figures. Even the hated Chris Grayling, who was responsible for implementing scything legal aid cuts and like Truss is not a lawyer, got the title (courtesy of Gray’s Inn, which made it rather unpopular for a while). So the passing over of Truss is significant.

However, despite the bitterness felt towards Truss by many lawyers, it would seem highly unlikely that she will be permanently excluded from bencher status. Much more plausible would be that Lincoln’s Inn is mindful of the backlash that Gray’s Inn received when Grayling got the gig, and has decided to put Truss’s bencher baptism on hold until the Brexit legal ruling has been concluded by the Supreme Court — and the likely further fuss has blown over.

This morning Lincoln’s Inn told Legal Cheek that it has “no comment” to make on the matter.


A barrister

Time this custom ended, I think. No reason for unsuitable people like Grayling or Truss to be Honorary Benchers.


Frankie Leung

Why is a person’s view being censored because the senior members of the Inn disagree with her stance. This is a dangerous precedent.



Because it’s a stupid and dangerous view – that judges should subordinate themselves to the mob. Someone who doesn’t believe in the rule of law (which this government does not) is not appropriate to be awarded any kind of status in the legal world.



That’s only slighty less hysterical bollocks than the tabs have been putting about.



It’s not the rule of law to which people object it’s the rule of Judges.



Funny to preach about the rule of law and then deliberately subvert the will of the people when the options given were either (a) or (b) – and both were offered as equally legitimate choices.



Well done – post of the week.

What utter bollox.

Boh Dear

Wow Anonymous @ 6:54am. That is definitely the dumbest thing written by anyone ever. You manage to prove you have no idea what you’re talking about only 17 words in to your post.

You don’t do yourself any favours from the 18th word onward either…






a. She’s got a job as chief legal correspondent for the Times.


b. On a recent trip to Loch Ness with Santa, a yeti and the Easter Bunny pushed her into the waiting arms of the Loch Ness Monster.

I think B is far more plausible.



You strike me as the sort of person who laughs so loudly at their own jokes that they fail to appreciate no one else is laughing.



Hello Katie!



Silence ball sack.



Is it conceivable that the hatred and misogyny shown to her by the commentariat on this website have led to either (a) being genuinely & seriously upset by the constant criticism, leading her to jack the whole thing in; or (b) led the management of the site to, regretfully, conclude that she had to go?

I know it’s fun to be bastards behind the mask of anonymity on a gossip website, but perhaps, just for a moment, you might want to think about the consequences.



She could just be on frickin holiday you bunch of point scoring creeps.

I love the implicit sexism btw in her being upset because she’s a delicate woman.


Ciaran Goggins

I quite like Katie. I abhor Truss. I am not anonymous. Is that subconscious phallocentric oppression my little snowflake?


Trussed up

Bit harsh on our Katie that I thought.

Would sooner hear that this was a fate that befell Liz Truss though. Sadly, there she was sat on the front bench in Parliament at PMQs blinking uncomprehendingly like a horse that had just munched its way through a patch of magic mushrooms.


Trevor Grant

Hard *cheese*



“That. Is. A. DISGRACE!”



She could just be on holiday?



Liz Truss was when that Mail headline ran, apparently.



This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.


Charlie Proudman

It’s because she’s a woman.



Meanwhile, back at the ranch, how does Gray’s get rid of halitosis laden Grayling?


Comments are closed.