Brexit

OPINION Brexit: we live in interesting times

<p><em>The best of times, the worst of times, writes David Langwallner </em><em>  </em> </p>
read more

Opinion: The ‘Brexit’ Parliament 2017-19

Amidst the sound and fury of the general election campaign, Dr Jack Simson Caird takes a step back to assess how the ‘Parliament of two halves’ contributed to the Brexit process
read more

Miller 2, the Supreme Court and the politics of constitutional interpretation

<p>The ‘political’ critique of the Supreme Court exposes a widespread and mistaken Westminster view of how our constitution works </p>
read more

Prorogation: principle and law, fact and causation

<p>The salient issue in relation to prorogation is whether the Prime Minister’s discretionary power should be limited pursuant to the constitutional principles underlying case law: the case for judicial intervention </p>
read more

Process of discovery

<p>What Brexit has taught us so far: with Parliament standing prorogued, the Commons Speaker gives a robust defence of Parliament’s role as a check on executive ‘malpractice’ and pledges all the ‘procedural creativity’ necessary </p>
read more

Brexit and the constitution: 7 lessons

<p>We’re having a constitutional moment... the Brexit process has exposed a dysfunctional relationship between law and politics in Westminster. Have we learned any lessons? </p>
read more

Brexit and the politics of law-making

<p>Should MPs be able to legislate contrary to the wishes of the government of the day? The Cooper Bill has raised fundamental questions over the relationship between law and politics in the United Kingdom </p>
read more

The ideologist: Jolyon Maugham QC

<p>Tax barrister, blogger and campaigner – the tenacious Jolyon Maugham QC has driven the legal debate on Brexit since the referendum result and won’t let the issue go </p>
read more

The ‘meaningful vote’

<p>The fight for the right to decide – a quick guide to the Parliamentary showdown over the Brexit deal and what it bodes for the future </p>
read more

Lawyers petition PM for a ‘People’s Vote’

<p>More than 1,500 lawyers signed a letter urging Theresa May to hold a second referendum on the final Brexit deal. </p><p>Organised by the group, Lawyers for A People’s Vote, the letter said: ‘A People’s Vote is the most credible and democratic way to ensure the legitimacy of a decision that will profoundly impact generations to come.’ </p><p>It argued that ‘democratic government is not frozen in time’ and that Parliament should not be bound by the 2016 vote any more than it should be by the 1975 referendum that took Britain into the EU, especially when there were ‘serious questions about the validity’ of the 2016 vote. They also said that voters are entitled to know what they are voting for. </p><p>Among the signatories were peers Helena Kennedy and Anthony Lester, more than 40 other QCs including Philippe Sands, Helen Mountfield, Henry Blaxland, Schona Jolly, Ben Emmerson and Hugh Tomlinson, former judge of the European Court of Justice Sir Konrad Schiemann, David Edward, a former judge of the Court of Justice of the European Communities and a smattering of City lawyers. </p><p>Meanwhile, a Brexit report from the Bar Council warned that the government’s moves to strip British terrorists of their citizenship was counter-productive, contrary to EU law and deprived the families of British victims of their right to see justice done in the UK courts. </p><p>The paper on human rights, the 27th of the Bar Council’s Brexit Papers, pointed to government figures published as a result of a freedom of information request showing that between 2013 and 2015, 60 British citizens were stripped of their nationality, mostly as a result of alleged terrorist activities, and estimated that since then, about 20 people a year have had their nationality removed by the Home Office. </p>
read more