Brexit Judgement

MPs + Opposition Parties are demanding a vote to include the proposed terms before triggering Article 50, but the EU will not start any negotiations until Article 50 is triggered. Looks like they're heading for stalemate.

I believe Article 50 contains a provision that it must be triggered in accordance with the Constitution of the Member State, and our High Court have now found it unconstitutional.

 

This just gives further evidence to the claim that we don't really live in a truly democratic country.

Our lives have been blighted by the actions of lawyers acting on behalf of the rich 1% and mega corporations for far too long.

Our laws and tax s are determined by a select few lawyers and often the people are let down badly as a result.

Being part of Europe was a fine example of this. The idea was good and then it was ruined by the unelected lawyers and judges who changed it into an expensive to run monster that imposed its views on the peoples unfairly.

We've voted to get out now so our votes should be respected and next the lawyers, judges,mps,and corporations should be made to respect the wishes of the people of this country.

If not there will be trouble in the streets are even worse we could end up with a British version of sonald trump running this so called democratic country.

 

The majority of the UK people want out - the MP's would be very unwise indeed to attempt to block or unnecessarily delay brexit - despite the fact that most of them wanted us to stay in.

The Courts are here to enforce the will of the people - they do this through legislation and case law - which is established by those who represent the will of the people.

Perhaps sometimes certain parties need to be reminded of this.

 

have read different..http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...cle-50-second-referendum-latest-a7395811.html but I do believe that is a load of bull.. I'm still 100% leave and it should be done sooner rather than later. If not we need a general election and get Maggie May out.

 

What does annoy me slightly is the media making a meal out of the impact that brexit is having on the economy. Anyone who voted out was fully aware that this would happen - and through voting out have accepted that this is a price they are willing to pay.

Very little coverage around the fact that actually the impact on the economy was not as bad as some pundits expected - and that strangely people aren't spooked and are continuing to spend - surprise, surprise.

 

The courts are there to enforce the law of the land , not the will of the people or the government . Fortunately in a free country we have an independent judiciary .

 

The law of the land is written and agreed by parliament - who in turn are elected by the people - the judiciary are there to enforce the will of the people via the law. I can't see that there is a distinction here.

As a democracy we collectively decide how we want our country to be governed - we have said we want out - that should be good enough - in fact it should take precedence over all other considerations.

The judiciary sticking it's oar in again - judges are no more than public servants.

 

The economy continues to do reasonably as BREXIT has not happened yet and may not for a few years.
If I remember my politics lessons correctly. The people elect the Government on the basis of the Party Manifestos, the Government then proposes Acts to the Parliament which debates, amends and then passes the Acts into legislation. The role of the judiciary, independent of both the Government and Parliament, is to interpret and apply the law to cases brought before them.
In this case a "member of the public" brought the case before the court and the judiciary interpreted and applied the law as it stands.
The importance of the case is such that the Supreme Court will hear the appeal as soon as possible and all 11 judges are probably going to going to sit together.
The real irony would be if the Government decided to appeal to the European Court.

 

Exactly my thoughts when the likes of that numpty Clegg stated that he wanted another referendum on the result of the talks/ deal we get with the EU.

Are these people actually in the same world as the rest of us?
They should be disregarded, as totally out of touch with reality.

The real irony as I understand it is that the judges are using an EU law to come to their ruling, a law that we intend to scrap just as soon as we can after Brexit.

 

It amazes me that 3 men in wigs can overrule 18.4million people.

 

Men in wigs have ruled this country for years, and there is no sign of it altering in the near future.
Maybe we should have had a revolution like the French did.

But then again, there is still time.

 

The ruling was not on BREXIT it was concerned with whether Article 50 can be activated by the Government without an instruction from Parliament.
Regardless of my personal opinion BREXIT will, in all likelihood, still occur in the next few years as that was what the referendum decided.
So Courts have overruled no one, but the timetable has become a little more problematic.

 

And as we all know, the longer it can be strung out the less likely it is to happen.
Which is why it was brought to court in the first place.