A Labour MP has warned Prime Minister Keir Starmer he is prepared to resign and trigger a by-election unless the government drops plans to restrict access to jury trials in England and Wales.

Karl Turner, the Labour MP for Kingston upon Hull East and a former shadow solicitor general, said he would consider standing down “to make a principled point” if Starmer and the justice secretary, David Lammy, press ahead with reforms that would remove jury trials for many lower-level offences. His intervention, first reported by *The Times*, adds to growing unrest on Labour’s backbenches over a package billed by ministers as a response to record court delays.

Turner argues the changes would weaken a fundamental safeguard and hit working-class defendants hardest. He said the right to be tried by a jury can act as a buffer against prejudice and an over-powerful state, and warned that curtailing it would have only a limited impact on the Crown Court backlog.

“To limit a fundamental right for what will make a marginal difference to the backlog is madness,” Turner was quoted as saying by the *Independent*.

Under proposals briefed by the government and previously outlined in parliamentary exchanges, jury trials would be removed for “either-way” offences where the likely prison sentence is three years or less. Ministers also want to restrict the ability of defendants to appeal from magistrates’ courts to the Crown Court, while increasing magistrates’ sentencing powers from 12 months to 18 months, with scope to rise to 24 months.

The plans also include the creation of new judge-only courts, described in earlier reports as “Swift Courts”, which ministers say could take around 20% less time than jury trials. Jury trials would be retained for indictable-only offences such as murder and rape.

Lammy and the Ministry of Justice have framed the reforms as necessary to tackle delays across the criminal courts system. The Crown Court backlog is about 80,000 cases, and government estimates cited in previous reporting suggest it could rise to 100,000 by 2028 without structural changes. Ministers argue that investment alone will not bring waiting times down fast enough for victims and defendants.

The reforms draw heavily on recommendations made by Sir Brian Leveson in a review of the criminal courts, which examined options for reducing the number of cases reaching the Crown Court and speeding up trials.

Turner, however, has described the proposals as “ideological” and cost-driven rather than evidence-based. He has also pointed to his own experience of the justice system, citing a prosecution in 2002 for handling stolen goods that was later dropped, as shaping his view of the importance of jury trials.

The row has already produced a rare Labour backbench revolt. Turner broke the whip for the first time since entering Parliament in 2010 when he backed a Conservative motion opposing the plans, according to *The Times*.

His warning comes amid signs of a wider Labour rebellion. Around 40 Labour MPs have signed a letter urging Starmer to reverse course, with the *Guardian* reporting that several signatories had not previously rebelled. The letter argues the public “will not stand for the erosion of a fundamental right”, and Turner has suggested further MPs will oppose any legislation if and when it is introduced.

The dispute has also been fuelled by comments attributed to the courts minister, Sarah Sackman, who has been reported as saying the reforms would proceed even if there were no backlog, a remark critics say undercuts the government’s claim that the package is solely a practical response to delays.

In a further sign the government is examining overseas models, *The Times* reported Lammy has been looking at Canadian approaches to judge-only trials, including during a visit to Toronto.

Politically, Turner’s threat carries particular weight because of the electoral arithmetic in his seat. He holds Kingston upon Hull East with a majority of 3,920, and Reform UK finished second at the last general election. Modelling cited by GB News suggests Reform UK could be competitive in a by-election, potentially turning a dispute over legal policy into an early test of Starmer’s authority and Labour’s unity.

No bill has yet been published, but ministers have signalled determination to proceed, raising the prospect of a significant confrontation in the Commons if the reforms are brought forward in their current form. A resignation, if it happened, would be a rare attempt to force the issue through the ballot box, echoing David Davis’s 2008 by-election in protest at extended detention without charge.