Government loses article 50 court fight
Scroll to see replies
You are waiting to see what happens on appeal to the Supreme court. They will fast track it.
You are wiating to see the government response on whether they will view a motion as sufficient or whether it will take legislation.
Wait and see. Too many unknowns at the moment.
It is a delay at worst, but an incovenient one that could be months or a few years .
We might not be out by 2020 at this rate.
You are wiating to see the government response on whether they will view a motion as sufficient or whether it will take legislation.
Wait and see. Too many unknowns at the moment.
It is a delay at worst, but an incovenient one that could be months or a few years .
We might not be out by 2020 at this rate.
If it does not happen there will be riots
Now. Calm.
It is the correct legal result. In effect, the Royal Prerogative does not exist to allow the Executive to do something which would take away rights of the people. This is well established.
The Court is correct at first instance. The judgements are thorough and reasoned.
I imagine the government played chess on this one - waiting to bring out its stronger arguments for the Supreme Court, the line used for the first instance was weak and Pannick, who has written books on constitutional law, ran with it and won superbly.
The Law cannot, and should not, interfere with politics. All the judiciary is doing here is mediating between two sides of a political squabble.
I doubt the same ruling will come from the Supreme Court, this is a unique circumstance, it is to simply follow the will of the people. There is no precedent. I think this is the angle the Appellants will take and ultimately be successful given how the people have in effect voted, without the need for their elected representatives to do so, for Article 50 to be invoked.
Besides that, if we don't trigger it, we will be pushed.
Now watch many MPs and the SNP vote against the Bill that will be put to the House of Commons, giving themselves a black eye and becoming unelectable. Again.
It is the correct legal result. In effect, the Royal Prerogative does not exist to allow the Executive to do something which would take away rights of the people. This is well established.
The Court is correct at first instance. The judgements are thorough and reasoned.
I imagine the government played chess on this one - waiting to bring out its stronger arguments for the Supreme Court, the line used for the first instance was weak and Pannick, who has written books on constitutional law, ran with it and won superbly.
The Law cannot, and should not, interfere with politics. All the judiciary is doing here is mediating between two sides of a political squabble.
I doubt the same ruling will come from the Supreme Court, this is a unique circumstance, it is to simply follow the will of the people. There is no precedent. I think this is the angle the Appellants will take and ultimately be successful given how the people have in effect voted, without the need for their elected representatives to do so, for Article 50 to be invoked.
Besides that, if we don't trigger it, we will be pushed.
Now watch many MPs and the SNP vote against the Bill that will be put to the House of Commons, giving themselves a black eye and becoming unelectable. Again.
Now we can have a proper process and not the sham capitulation to UKIP that Theresa May's shockingly indifferent government are currently engaged in.
This must mean the end of Brexit as the extremists in the Tory Party envisage it and the beginning of a proper, sensible debate on the subject. It also means we can move from the agenda being controlled by the offshore oligarchs who run the tabloids to it having a chance of being controlled by what is genuinely in the interests of this country and not a few very rich tax dodgers with fanatic political agendas.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Now we can have a proper process and not the sham capitulation to UKIP that Theresa May's shockingly indifferent government are currently engaged in.
This must mean the end of Brexit as the extremists in the Tory Party envisage it and the beginning of a proper, sensible debate on the subject. It also means we can move from the agenda being controlled by the offshore oligarchs who run the tabloids to it having a chance of being controlled by what is genuinely in the interests of this country and not a few very rich tax dodgers with fanatic political agendas.
Now we can have a proper process and not the sham capitulation to UKIP that Theresa May's shockingly indifferent government are currently engaged in.
This must mean the end of Brexit as the extremists in the Tory Party envisage it and the beginning of a proper, sensible debate on the subject. It also means we can move from the agenda being controlled by the offshore oligarchs who run the tabloids to it having a chance of being controlled by what is genuinely in the interests of this country and not a few very rich tax dodgers with fanatic political agendas.
It will be appealed to the Supreme Court and I worry that they may fear a public backlash.
Original post by Bornblue
It will be appealed to the Supreme Court and I worry that they may fear a public backlash.
Lord Neuberger wants a constitution for Britain, so he will be defending this judgement on the Supreme and he is the one with the most influence.
I am not exactly partying but I think the wind is changing and we are heading back towards Planet Sensible from our madcap recent period. All we need now is a proper government.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Now we can have a proper process and not the sham capitulation to UKIP that Theresa May's shockingly indifferent government are currently engaged in.
This must mean the end of Brexit as the extremists in the Tory Party envisage it and the beginning of a proper, sensible debate on the subject. It also means we can move from the agenda being controlled by the offshore oligarchs who run the tabloids to it having a chance of being controlled by what is genuinely in the interests of this country and not a few very rich tax dodgers with fanatic political agendas.
Now we can have a proper process and not the sham capitulation to UKIP that Theresa May's shockingly indifferent government are currently engaged in.
This must mean the end of Brexit as the extremists in the Tory Party envisage it and the beginning of a proper, sensible debate on the subject. It also means we can move from the agenda being controlled by the offshore oligarchs who run the tabloids to it having a chance of being controlled by what is genuinely in the interests of this country and not a few very rich tax dodgers with fanatic political agendas.
Eitherwayweareslavestothegoverment
Original post by Mimir
Now. Calm.
It is the correct legal result. In effect, the Royal Prerogative does not exist to allow the Executive to do something which would take away rights of the people. This is well established.
The Court is correct at first instance. The judgements are thorough and reasoned.
I imagine the government played chess on this one - waiting to bring out its stronger arguments for the Supreme Court, the line used for the first instance was weak and Pannick, who has written books on constitutional law, ran with it and won superbly.
The Law cannot, and should not, interfere with politics. All the judiciary is doing here is mediating between two sides of a political squabble.
I doubt the same ruling will come from the Supreme Court, this is a unique circumstance, it is to simply follow the will of the people. There is no precedent. I think this is the angle the Appellants will take and ultimately be successful given how the people have in effect voted, without the need for their elected representatives to do so, for Article 50 to be invoked.
Besides that, if we don't trigger it, we will be pushed.
Now watch many MPs and the SNP vote against the Bill that will be put to the House of Commons, giving themselves a black eye and becoming unelectable. Again.
It is the correct legal result. In effect, the Royal Prerogative does not exist to allow the Executive to do something which would take away rights of the people. This is well established.
The Court is correct at first instance. The judgements are thorough and reasoned.
I imagine the government played chess on this one - waiting to bring out its stronger arguments for the Supreme Court, the line used for the first instance was weak and Pannick, who has written books on constitutional law, ran with it and won superbly.
The Law cannot, and should not, interfere with politics. All the judiciary is doing here is mediating between two sides of a political squabble.
I doubt the same ruling will come from the Supreme Court, this is a unique circumstance, it is to simply follow the will of the people. There is no precedent. I think this is the angle the Appellants will take and ultimately be successful given how the people have in effect voted, without the need for their elected representatives to do so, for Article 50 to be invoked.
Besides that, if we don't trigger it, we will be pushed.
Now watch many MPs and the SNP vote against the Bill that will be put to the House of Commons, giving themselves a black eye and becoming unelectable. Again.
Recent polls show that if the Brexit decision was rerun, it would go the other way now.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/10/24/brexit-is-not-the-will-of-the-british-people-it-never-has-been/
The Supreme Court is dominated by Lord Neuberger, who strongly believes Britain should have a written Constitution, so he's hardly likely to be in favour of this being subject to arbitrary government diktat.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Lord Neuberger wants a constitution for Britain, so he will be defending this judgement on the Supreme and he is the one with the most influence.
I am not exactly partying but I think the wind is changing and we are heading back towards Planet Sensible from our madcap recent period. All we need now is a proper government.
I am not exactly partying but I think the wind is changing and we are heading back towards Planet Sensible from our madcap recent period. All we need now is a proper government.
Hopefully but look at the reaction already. People accusing the courts of betraying the people etc.
The Supreme Court is wary of its public perception, I hope they don't let the inevitable backlash prevent them from deciding the case on legal grounds.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Recent polls show that if the Brexit decision was rerun, it would go the other way now.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/10/24/brexit-is-not-the-will-of-the-british-people-it-never-has-been/
The Supreme Court is dominated by Lord Neuberger, who strongly believes Britain should have a written Constitution, so he's hardly likely to be in favour of this being subject to arbitrary government diktat.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/10/24/brexit-is-not-the-will-of-the-british-people-it-never-has-been/
The Supreme Court is dominated by Lord Neuberger, who strongly believes Britain should have a written Constitution, so he's hardly likely to be in favour of this being subject to arbitrary government diktat.
Because the polls were right the first time
Majority voted Brexit. Brexit it is....
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Recent polls show that if the Brexit decision was rerun, it would go the other way now.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/10/24/brexit-is-not-the-will-of-the-british-people-it-never-has-been/
The Supreme Court is dominated by Lord Neuberger, who strongly believes Britain should have a written Constitution, so he's hardly likely to be in favour of this being subject to arbitrary government diktat.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/10/24/brexit-is-not-the-will-of-the-british-people-it-never-has-been/
The Supreme Court is dominated by Lord Neuberger, who strongly believes Britain should have a written Constitution, so he's hardly likely to be in favour of this being subject to arbitrary government diktat.
If people chose not to vote then that is their own fault and they should deal with the consequences.
The public voted out and it would be political suicide for Labour to vote against the publics wishes.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Recent polls show that if the Brexit decision was rerun, it would go the other way now.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/10/24/brexit-is-not-the-will-of-the-british-people-it-never-has-been/
The Supreme Court is dominated by Lord Neuberger, who strongly believes Britain should have a written Constitution, so he's hardly likely to be in favour of this being subject to arbitrary government diktat.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/10/24/brexit-is-not-the-will-of-the-british-people-it-never-has-been/
The Supreme Court is dominated by Lord Neuberger, who strongly believes Britain should have a written Constitution, so he's hardly likely to be in favour of this being subject to arbitrary government diktat.
Individualism has no place in the Rule of Law
I predict Brexit will definitely happen and there shall be no second referendum.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Recent polls show that if the Brexit decision was rerun, it would go the other way now.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/10/24/brexit-is-not-the-will-of-the-british-people-it-never-has-been/
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/10/24/brexit-is-not-the-will-of-the-british-people-it-never-has-been/
Pathetic manipulation of statistics and a load of baseless what-ifery. Remain lost the referendum fair and square and that is the end of it.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Lord Neuberger wants a constitution for Britain, so he will be defending this judgement on the Supreme and he is the one with the most influence.
I am not exactly partying but I think the wind is changing and we are heading back towards Planet Sensible from our madcap recent period. All we need now is a proper government.
I am not exactly partying but I think the wind is changing and we are heading back towards Planet Sensible from our madcap recent period. All we need now is a proper government.
What a German sounding name loooool
I find it hilarious that all the people shouting about 'taking our country back' are now complaining that the same Parliament they want to hand power to gets to have a say on the most important issue for the country in generations.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by sr90
I find it hilarious that all the people shouting about 'taking our country back' are now complaining that the same Parliament they want to hand power to gets to have a say on the most important issue for the country in generations.
One could also say conversely that it's funny the people who wants to reduce the power and influence of our parliament is seeking for our parliament to have the power to approve or disapprove Article 50.
Original post by yudothis
What a German sounding name loooool
Jewish, actually
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- OCR A level History
- Petition to STOP student loans going down
- [Official] 2024 US elections megathread
- Is the UK prepared for WW3?
- Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 3A (9PL0 3A) 16th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- India Willoughby reports jk rowling to the police
- Terrorist NHS worker planned to bomb hospital
- Evaluate the interpretations
- do you still have to pay back ALL of maintenance loan if you don't use all of it?
- UK government loses Rwanda scheme appeal in the Supreme Court
- Woman attacked by her own dog, an xl bully
- [Official Thread] Russian invasion of Ukraine
- I have no friends, no relationship, nothing, I'm rejected for my Nationality
- Should digital media spreading venomous hatred be regulated?
- What do you think will happen to Donald the dump Trump?
- Is Israel winning
- Top Army Chief Warns of Britons Facing Draft in Potential UK-Russia Conflict
- how could anyone be pro-israel?
- Who regrets the outcome of Brexit??
- Help with Edexcel AS level politics question
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
