Brexit And Supreme Court.

[saintpeter48]

Just who is paying for this expensive farce, you and me no doubt!!

[mikey4444]

FF......What amazes me about the people that oppose the Court action is that the BREXIT campaign, was all about "taking back control of our country" as well as all the incipient xenophobia, and barely disguised racism.

And that is what the Judges did. Our own resident New Judge has already said that the Appeal will fail, as the original legal point decided by the High Court was correct.

So, to answer StPeters question again........the State is paying for the current Appeal, because Mrs May thought better than the Judges !

She should abandon the Appeal, and get into Parliament and have a proper vote.

[EDDIE51]

PP I did not realise the government had tried to say that no court could discuss 'The Royal Prerogative'
Jesus, if they had got away with that it would mean the Prime Minister
( in whom is invested the 'Power of Royal Prerogative' ) could introduce ANY law he/she wanted just on their own whim!! Talk about dictatorship!!!

[mikey4444]

DB....you are right, of course so why is Mrs May wasting valuable time and money, fighting a case that she cannot win ?

She is busy running up a one way street.

[naomi24]

According to Eddie, it's all part of a dastardly plan to renege on Brexit.

[ToraToraTora]

I can smell what's going on here, the establishment are mightily angry at the audacity of the people voting out of their beloved gravy train. So they are wriggling around trying to welch on it.

[EDDIE51]

Good point Mikey, taking back control, by handing the entire law making process over to one person and allowing them to introduce any law with no consultation at all with anyone not even their own ministers. Few dictators in history can have had that much power!

[beegeebee]

It wouldn't appear so bad if one of the Judges had stood up (as an M.P. would be required to do in Parliament) and said he had a pecuniary interest in the proceedings.

[Peter Pedant]

// was all about "taking back control of our country" as well as all the incipient xenophobia, and barely disguised racism. //

yeah at the time even libertarian free-tee ( see above for some of todays lamentable pensees ) wanted to repatriate the courts and liberate from EU law - My irony klaxon did sort of "ping" at that

but it is all different now - I agree
what a difference a refendum makes ( thx to Harold WIlson but I have changed the words a n
bit)

[Orderlimit]

As usual mikey, you make no sense at all but just accuse people of racism, usual banal far left-wing drivel. The Eu referendum was clear and decisive yet you oppose it because it didn't go your way

[EDDIE51]

beegeebee A judge MUST decide the law without any bias because of their own view! It is a basic tenant of law ,that Justice is 'Blind'.
On a practical level how many people (not just judges) have no opinion on leaving the EU ?
But as said this IS NOT !!! about the referendum or Brexit!!
It is to decide if the Prime Minister can on his/her own initiative, force through a law that affects the rights of UK citizens with no consultation with ministers or parliment !

[Old_Geezer]

That they may have the right to do so after parliament has already agreed to a referendum, is unlikely to have unexpected wider implications. It's a formality anyway. Remainers knew this but chose to cause trouble despite knowing it.

[jim360]

I can fully respect that people want the referendum result to be respected and implemented. Of course it should be -- morally, so to speak, there is no other option open to the country now but to work towards leaving the EU. But this isn't about that, it's about the legal process for implementing it. Divebuddy's post in that sense hits the nail on the head, and I do wish that more on the Leave side would adopt that position.

Nor is it outrageous, no matter how cynical you may think it, to bring this case before the High Court, as some did in June. Likewise, for the Government to appeal. Both are perfectly proper, sensible, and a privilege and right of all in this country. The decision to leave the EU has a profound effect upon the rights of UK citizens. It's in everyone's interests, therefore, to ensure that those rights be given the proper protections. No-one should be vilified for choosing to stand up for this. Ever.

[-Talbot-]

Surely the same people who were in support of Gina Miller using the courts should now also be in support of the governments actions?

[Orderlimit]

jim360
I can fully respect that people want the referendum result to be respected and implemented.

Well said Jim, nice to hear !

[EDDIE51]

I back up Jim and orderlimit. The referendum must be respected and the result implemented. BUT, it CAN NOT be done by illegal means!

[jim360]

I support the government's right to appeal. I don't, yet, see any reason to suppose that their appeal will succeed.

PP has already put up the court transcript for the first day. It makes for a lot of reading, and I've only skimmed bits (179 pages or so). First impressions are that the Government's case is the same as it was before, perhaps adding an appeal to populism, eg from the end of today's proceedings:

Mr Eadie (on behalf of HMG): "... If you said to the ordinary man or woman on the street, 'Do you regard the fact that a referendum has occurred to be remotely relevant to the question of whether or not the Government can give Article 50 notice?' the answer would be, 'Of course it is.'"

Lord Neuberger: "If you put it as 'remotely relevant' --"

Mr Eadie: "Relevant as a matter of law."

Lord Neuberger: "As a matter of law, they will probably say, 'I will ask a lawyer.'"

Anyway, there are three more days of submissions to go, and then a month or so of deliberations before the Supreme Court ruling, but if this particular appeal is a "farce", then you should look to HM Government for trying to appeal a decision on the grounds that, "I just don't agree with the last one but only because I'm stubbornly sticking to my already-rejected argument."

[EDDIE51]

^^ Exactly why I have come to think that this is a 'stitch up' and the PM has been 'set up to fail' at getting A50 implemented.