Wikileaks editor Julian Assange is appealing to the Supreme Court in the U.K. to prevent extradition to Sweden.

ZDNet is reporting that Assange’s lawyers are laying out their arguments today to the seven law lords of the Supreme Court. The basis of their argument is that Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny acted beyond her powers in issuing a European Arrest Warrant. They say that the High Court made a bad judgment in recognizing the EAW as valid.

The argument states that Ny “cannot act as judicial authority” when issuing an EAW. They go on to argue that she “lacks the impartiality and the independence from both the executive and the parties which constitute essential features of the exercise of judicial authority under domestic and European law.”

In court, the defense attorneys gave the judges 15 volumes of legal findings to back up its arguments. The key point is for the judges to consider the the definition of “judicial authority.”

For those just joining us, Assange is battling extradition to Sweden over two charges of sexual assault.

This of course has sprung up conspiracy theories that the U.S. is pulling the strings of Sweden’s push for extradition. It’s not hard to see why when you take into account the embarrassment the U.S. suffered last year when Wikileaks leaked thousands of U.S. embassy documents.

If his Supreme Court appeal fails, he can appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. The ECHR has 14 days to respond. If the appeal is rejected, Assange will be extradited. If the appeal is accepted, he will remain in the U.K. until the case is resolved.

We’ll keep you updated on any changes, including the decision, as they happen.

[lead photo courtesy of acidpolly on flickr]