The Secretary of State for the Home Department had made a decision depriving the appellant (SB) of British citizenship after she had travelled to Syria to join ISIL. The Supreme Court considered appeals against three decisions relating to SB. The court held that, among other things, the Court of Appeal had mistakenly believed that, when an individual’s right to have a fair hearing of an appeal came into conflict with the requirements of national security, her right to a fair hearing had to prevail. If a vital public interest - in the present case, the safety of the public - made it impossible for a case to be fairly heard, then the courts could not ordinarily hear it. The appropriate response to the problem in the present case was for the appeal to be stayed until SB was in a position to play an effective part in it without the safety of the public being compromised. The Secretary of State’s appeals in each of the proceedings before the court would be allowed, and SB’s cross-appeal would be dismissed.