Assembly bill likely to be challenged in supreme court.

It is likely that although  AMs have voted to fast-track a law to prevent what Welsh Government ministers have called a post-Brexit "power-grab"the UK government will appeal to the Supreme Court 

A bill was previously proposed by Plaid Cymru's Brexit spokesman Steffan Lewis last year. His proposal received unanimous backing in an assembly vote in January.

Though alas not this time  as the Welsh Conservative group in the assembly decided to vote against the bill, with Tory AM David Melding saying the timetable for debate was so "lightning fast that scrutiny would only be cursory where it would be possible at all".

Though many speculate they may have been rang up by number ten and told to behave,

Inrestingly, UKIP Wales leader Neil Hamilton supported the Continuity Bill, saying he could not see how it "gets in the way of the Brexit process".

Most of the UKIP group, which had a free vote, voted with Mr Hamilton with the exception of Gareth Bennett who voted against introducing the bill as emergency legislation 

A total of 44 AMs backed the plan, with 10 against.

The BBC claim that

The proposed law is the Welsh Government's insurance policy against plans included in the withdrawal bill, which is currently making its way through Parliament.
Under the bill's current plans, powers in devolved areas such as agriculture that are currently operated in Brussels are due to flow back to Westminster rather than Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast.
It has led to months of negotiations between UK, Welsh and Scottish government ministers about changing the bill.
UK Cabinet Office Minister David Lidington said, in a speech last week, that a "considerable" offer had been made to amend the bill, which would see the vast majority of the powers returning from the EU going to the devolved administrations.
But the proposals have been rejected by the Welsh and Scottish governments for not going far enough.
The discussions are set to continue, and the Welsh Government is asking AMs to agree to fast-track the bill so it can be passed before the withdrawal bill is passed into law by MPs in Westminster.
At least one academic has warned that the bill could lead to a Supreme Court challenge from the UK government. Scottish ministers have also proposed similar legislation.
Welsh Finance Secretary Mr Drakeford and Scottish Brexit Secretary Michael Russell will meet Mr Lidington on Thursday, ahead of further talks between the first ministers of Scotland and Wales, and Prime Minister Theresa May on 14 March.
A bill was previously proposed by Plaid Cymru's Brexit spokesman Steffan Lewis last year. His proposal received unanimous backing in an assembly vote in January.
A UK government spokesman has previously said that a Continuity Bill was unnecessary and that it would be better for the Welsh Government "to concentrate on reaching an agreement on the withdrawal bill".

This means the legislation will now pass through the assembly quicker than usual. The bill could clear the legislative process by as soon as 21 March, if AMs choose to make it law.

A similar bill has been proposed in Scotland , but I am afraid that the likelihood that if it goes to the supreme court then Westminster will win.

As John Dixon. writes on his Borthlas blog

I can understand why supporters of devolution see the UK Government’s approach to Brexit as being something of a ‘power-grab’ (and I welcome the Assembly’s efforts to protect its powers); but I can equally understand why the UK Government sees a body which has, from a London perspective, no more right to its existence than a county council as getting above itself when it dares to challenge the central power.  Legally, Westminster has every right to be “imposing its will on Wales and Scotland” as the Western Mail puts it.  And complaining about “an administration that considers itself superior” is empty rhetoric.

If we don’t want a body which is constitutionally superior to behave as though it is constitutionally superior, we need to take away its constitutional superiority.  At the least, that requires a change in the UK constitution to recognise that the people, not the monarch, are sovereign.  And for the Assembly to be treated as any sort of equal with Westminster requires us to treat powers held in Westminster as having been loaned to Westminster by the people of Wales rather than treat those exercised by the Assembly as having been loaned to the people of Wales by a hereditary monarch.  It’s a paradigm shift which I doubt the Western Mail is ready to make.

 In some ways I would welcome a Supreme Court decision if it backs the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Parliament , it would recognise  some degree of sovereignty of devolved power, but if it does not it will rove that Westminster can not only take power back but abolish devolved legislatures in the same manner   that Margaret Thatcher abolished  Ken Livingston's GLC which she saw as a thorn in the side of her government  and despite the mass media attacks on the council could not rely on the democratic process seeing the Tories win control by elections.

Win or lose we may find that the next few months will define the constitutional  future of devolution.