Turn on thread page Beta

The EU breaches Britain's 1689 Bill of Rights when enforcing laws on us watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Britain's 1689 Bill of Rights Act:

    http://avalon.law.yale.edu/17th_century/england.asp

    I, A.B., do swear that I do from my heart abhor, detest and abjure as impious and heretical this damnable doctrine and position, that princes excommunicated or deprived by the Pope or any authority of the see of Rome may be deposed or murdered by their subjects or any other whatsoever. And I do declare that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state or potentate hath or ought to have any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm. So help me God.
    and it hasn't been revoked:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_o...9#Legal_status

    So, it is illegal under British Law for the EU to dictate laws upon Britain!!!!
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Recent laws (in general) supersede old laws, formal repeal or abolition is not necessary, that's just how Parliamentary Sovereignty works.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    Recent laws (in general) supersede old laws, formal repeal or abolition is not necessary, that's just how Parliamentary Sovereignty works.
    I'm not sure you're correct here. For any new laws to supersede they have to explicitly state this. If you look at the Government legal pages they will state that an Act has been superseded by a newer one. However, as I understand it, the Bill of Rights hasnt.

    Here is an interesting read:

    http://www.vernoncoleman.com/euillegally.html

    Update: I have had a look around and the general consensus seems to be that the 1689 Bill of Rights still exists.....
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by billydisco)
    I'm not sure you're correct here. For any new laws to supersede they have to explicitly state this. If you look at the Government legal pages they will state that an Act has been superseded by a newer one. However, as I understand it, the Bill of Rights hasnt.

    Here is an interesting read:

    http://www.vernoncoleman.com/euillegally.html

    Update: I have had a look around and the general consensus seems to be that the 1689 Bill of Rights still exists.....
    Doctrine of implied repeal vs doctrine of express repeal

    Former holds unless we are dealing with 'constitutional statutes' (Thoburn) - which the BoR most certainly comes under
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Law-Hopeful)
    Doctrine of implied repeal vs doctrine of express repeal

    Former holds unless we are dealing with 'constitutional statutes' (Thoburn) - which the BoR most certainly comes under
    So where is the express repeal?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by billydisco)
    So where is the express repeal?
    Hm, more of a "temporary, voluntary abrogation" than a "repeal"

    Also, that distinction isn't a hard and fast rule, more relevant for recent constitutional statues such as the Scotland Act 1998 etc than a 326 year old BoR

    I never really liked constitutional law tbh so I can't guarantee this is all accurate
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Also, while it's specified in the Act, what you're arguing is being broken is not so much the Act but rather the Oath of Allegiance. Which it would be the MPs breaching rather than the EU.

    EDIT: Just checked, and MPs don't even take an oath under this wording any more, only Privy Counsellors do.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    But the EU, strictly speaking, is neither a "foreign prince, person, prelate, state or [a] potentate"...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Errm16)
    But the EU, strictly speaking, is neither a "foreign prince, person, prelate, state or [a] potentate"...
    The EU has a Parliament, flag, currency and territory, its therefore a state.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by billydisco)
    The EU has a Parliament, flag, currency and territory, its therefore a state.
    Oh, if only it were that simple.

    If it's that easy to set up a state, then is IS a "state"?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by billydisco)
    The EU has a Parliament, flag, currency and territory, its therefore a state.
    It has "territory" in the sense that any organisation of states has territory. It does not have the capacity to control and administer that territory, however. Nor does it have international recognition as a state, and all its constituent states are recognised as independent states internationally.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    We somehow don't grant Protestants and only Protestants the right to own guns.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: September 6, 2015
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.