Can Boris Do It?

[Khandro]

Restaurant lunch with Junker (sounds boozy) on Monday. Supreme court will throw out this proroguing nonsense challenge on Tuesday? The pound is shooting up. Everything's going tickety-boo, wouldn't you say?

[teacake44]

You can discuss politics till the cows come home, MPs / PMs now or in the past feather their own nests and run, and you have little or no control. So just look after your own ends as they do and everyone else.

[Zacs-Master]

But the governments actions can seriously affect your ‘ends’.

[teacake44]

I'm all right Jack. as I said. :)

[Khandro]

Moves afoot?
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1177410/brexit-news-EU-news-jean-claude-juncker-no-deal-brexit-supporters-unpatriotic-latest

[jim360]

You did ask before, Khandro, and I answered: "unlawful" doesn't need to mean counter to a specific law, but only to general principles of law, or the Rule of Law. If there was a specific law being broken then the word would be "illegal".

[Khandro]

jim; You had me scurry away to check & it seems though you are correct in by pointing out the difference, you are in fact doing Boris a favour, in that if it isn't against any specific law, he has no need to act on this decision;
http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/legal-miscellaneous/difference-between-illegal-and-unlawful/

[vetuste_ennemi]

There is no deal which will be in Britain's interest. The only option which delivers a proper Brexit is "no deal".

Sad that.

Like others I don't trust this backstop narrative. The May " deal" is Versaille: a surrender document inflicted on a vanquished foe by a vindictive conqueror.
It's all there - war reparations - the lot.

[jim360]

// if it isn't against any specific law, he has no need to act on this decision //

Depends on what the Court says. For example the Scottish Court ruled that it was unlawful but then also decided not to enforce that ruling, pending the Supreme Court ruling. If the SC agrees with the Scottish Court, and also ruled that the government *must* reverse that decision, then it would be obliged to listen. And besides, Johnson has already undercut that: he has already said that if the Supreme Court ruled against him then he'd recall Parliament.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Question one: how do we stop Brexit?

Question two: how do we pretend to be the defenders of democracy?

Over to you, Jim.