Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Wednesday January 25 2017, @05:31PM   Printer-friendly
from the we've-always-been-at-war-with-eurasia dept.

The UK Supreme Court has ruled that Parliament must vote on and approve of invoking Article 50 which triggers arrangements for leaving the European Union:

The Supreme Court has dismissed the government's appeal in a landmark case about Brexit, meaning Parliament will be required to give its approval before official talks on leaving the EU can begin. The ruling is a significant, although not totally unexpected, setback for Theresa May.

[...] The highest court in England and Wales has dismissed the government's argument that it has the power to begin official Brexit negotiations with the rest of the EU without Parliament's prior agreement. By a margin of eight to three, the 11 justices upheld November's High Court ruling which stated that it would be unlawful for the government to rely on executive powers known as the royal prerogative to implement the outcome of last year's referendum.

Also at NYT, WSJ, and The Guardian.

Previously: Brexit Court Defeat for UK Government


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 25 2017, @06:39PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 25 2017, @06:39PM (#458577)

    the intellectual dishonesty that is endemic in some quarters today.

    Or just plain, simple ignorance. I would suspect that your regular UK citizen has a better handle on the the relative powers between Parliament, judicial, and executive than they do of the legal relationship between the UK and the EU. I think when the former PM came out and said "we are going to put this to an up or down vote", he (and the very public referendum campaign that followed) sure made it sound like the referendum outcome was going to be a done deal. Perhaps the "stay" side would have done well to point out during that campaign that the vote outcome was not going to decide the issue, but I suspect that even they didn't really think it through that far.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by sjames on Wednesday January 25 2017, @07:33PM

    by sjames (2882) on Wednesday January 25 2017, @07:33PM (#458609) Journal

    Sure, but the PM and party leaders have no excuses. They knew damned well they were playing political games. Perhaps some were even hoping the courts would save their backsides at the last moment after they have already benefited from the political mud wrestling.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 25 2017, @11:26PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 25 2017, @11:26PM (#458720)

    Having been through school in the UK up to PhD, I can confidently say I had no clue about the difference between Parliament, government and courts until I went to the USA and learned the US system. Then I could translate it back into UK term and realize that we have much less separation of powers. I.e. in the UK the Executive is a subset of Congress.

    99% of the UK had less school that I did - in my schoo about 75% left at age 16. So I can guaran-fucking-tee it that the low-info voters that took us out of EU had absolutely no fucking idea about the UK let alone differences between UK/EU.

    Take back control, $350B/wk, WW2, fox hunting for all, ra ra ra!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26 2017, @07:07AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26 2017, @07:07AM (#458841)

      I thought you were joking at first. But if that is your belief then YOU are part of the reason a majority voted to leave.