THE Scottish and UK Governments went head to head in the Court of Session this week over Alister Jack's decision to use a Section 35 order for the first time.
The Scottish Secretary used the little-known part of the Scotland Act to block Holyrood's gender reform legislation from becoming law in January this year.
But do the UK's arguments stack up? Will they be able to prove that Jack properly considered the evidence and made an informed decision before using the veto? And did the gender reforms really have an adverse effect on the operation of law on reserved matters?
READ MORE: Stephen Flynn sparks questions over SNP independence policy
Joining our political reporter Abbi Garton-Crosbie to discuss the ins and outs of the two-day hearing in Edinburgh, presided over by Judge Lady Haldane, is Nick McKerrell, senior lecturer in law at Glasgow Caledonian University.
McKerrell gives his view on the UK Government's arguments, some of which he described as "weak", but admits it is difficult to call which side may win the first round of the judicial review.
It is also widely expected it will make its way to the Supreme Court eventually, as whichever side comes out on top, the other is likely to appeal the decision.
Elsewhere, political reporter Steph Brawn speaks to Laura Mahon (below) from Alcohol Focus Scotland on issues around alcohol advertising and Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP), ahead of an expected rise of the MUP to 65p.
She also told how it is “frustrating” the Scottish Government does not have full power to control alcohol advertising.
Elsewhere, our reporters discuss Shona Robison's first FMQs standing in for Humza Yousaf, who is in New York for Climate Week, and a key amendment to the First Minister's motion on independence strategy put forward by one SNP MP.
You can listen to Episode 3 of Season 2 on the Omny streaming platform, Spotify and our website below.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here