Writing in the Mail on Sunday, Theresa May warned judges that primary legislation needs to be brought in to enable the Government to deport more foreign criminals.
Unfortunately, some judges evidently do not regard a debate in Parliament on new immigration rules, followed by the unanimous adoption of those rules, as evidence that Parliament actually wants to see those new rules implemented.
One judge, she noted, had justified his decision on the basis that the new guidance had been subject only to "a weak form of Parliamentary scrutiny".
It is essential to democracy that the elected representatives of the people make the laws that govern this country - and not the judges.
Yet some judges seem to believe that they can ignore Parliament's wishes if they think that the procedures for parliamentary scrutiny have been 'weak'. That appears actually to mean that they can ignore Parliament when they think it came to the wrong conclusion.
More top news
Scientists claim bubbling magma is behind the 'man in the moon' image rather than an asteroid strike
Our Political Editor Tom Bradby has been tackling readers' questions about David Cameron's conference speech.
Author Stephen Fry has said he regrets his 'pathetic' 15-year addiction to cocaine after writing about it in his new autobiography.