Gina Miller had her legal team launch a case against Boris Johnson over his decision to shut down Parliament until mid-October amid the ongoing Brexit debate. But George Galloway warned the anti-Brexit campaigner the Supreme Court is "sure to uphold" a previous ruling from the High Court siding with Mr Johnson and the Government. Speaking to RT UK, Mr Galloway said: "They tried everything they can, they’ve thrown everything but the kitchen sink at the Brexit decision and so far they have failed to sink it.
"This is now an appeal to the Supreme Court to judge on whether or not the earlier court decision was correct.
"I believe the Government will win the case because the Courts will not want to open the can of worms which is the British non-constitution."
Mr Galloway continued: "The fiction is that Parliament sits at Her Majesty’s pleasure and if she were to decide she never wanted it to sit, then we’d have to have another civil war.
"God forbid that any such thing should happen again. But it is only a fiction - the Queen acts according to the advice of her Prime Minister.
"He is actually not the Prime Minister of Britain, he is her Prime Minister and she was constitutionally-bound to accept his advice and his advice was a political not a legal matter.
"I feel sure the Supreme Court will uphold the earlier English court’s decisions."
Ms Miller's legal team argued in the Supreme Court the decision to prorogue Parliament should be considered invalid because of the allegedly "unlawful" advice Mr Johnson gave the Queen to secure permission to shut down the Commons.
Following the first day of proceedings James Forsyth, political editor at the Spectator, said: “On the government side, concern about which way the Supreme Court will go is up following the morning’s session.
“Readers of the legal tea leaves reckon that the thrust of Lady Hale’s questioning was not good for Her Majesty’s Government.”
The case was previously heard in London's High Court but the judges rejected her claims the suspension of Parliament was a “purely political” move and was therefore “not a matter for the courts”.
But the Inner House of the Court of Session in Edinburgh, Scotland’s highest court, last week ruled Mr Johnson and his advisors misled the monarch with the advice provided to her to make the decisions.
The Institute for Government said that while the Supreme Court will “probably” try to render English and Scottish law as consistent, judges could “in theory agree with both the English High Court and the Scottish Court of Session.”
Independence opinion poll is blow for Sturgeon: Scots want to stay in UK [POLL]
Nigel Farage exposes Jo Swinson's Brexit backtrack with shock recording [VIDEO]
EU's furious backlash at Bettel for damaging 'European cause' after hijacking talks [ANALYSIS]
But the organisation added the Supreme Court can “rule the prorogation was lawful under English law but not under Scottish law”.
“In that case, the prorogation would be unlawful in the UK overall,” the institute said.
Asked whether he would be ready to bring Parliament back if the court ruled against the Government, Mr Johnson said he would “wait and see the findings of the judges.”
On Monday, the Daily Mail reported top Government advisors believe they have found a loophole in the Benn Act to ensure the Prime Minister is not forced to apply it.
If implemented, the Benn Act would force the Prime Minister to demand a new extension to the Brexit deadline but Mr Johnson rejected suggestion he may ask the EU to further delay Brexit.