This post does not focus on assessing the substantive grounds which can be relied on to challenge the lawfulness of Yvette Cooper’s decision-making in seeking to proscribe Palestine Action. Instead, it focuses on the constitutional implications of the decision to proscribe Palestine Action. In short, I argue that the Home Secretary’s decision collapses the distinction between violence against the person and violence against property. This represents a seismic break with constitutional norms regarding how the state regulates the fundamental rights to freedom of thought and conscience, freedom of expression, and the right to freedom of assembly. The decision is a chilling example of executive power being wielded to coercively constrain personal and collective liberties in the UK.