CarrieVS wrote:As you may have heard, the High Court ruled in November that the Government does not have the power to trigger Brexit without passing a vote in Parliament.
The Government appealed against this ruling in the Supreme Court: the case is being heard this week and is expected to reach a verdict on Thursday.
I've been following the case, but I didn't want to necro this thread. Maybe we can have a Brexit thread, like how Trump got a new thread after he was elected president (but with a more neutral name). I lean heavily towards the High Court's verdict on the legal grounds but I understand the distrust towards it. It's not like several MPs didn't blatantly announce desires to vote against it. Here's the file on the case: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2016-0196.html and the High Court's verdict: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Adm ... /2768.html.
Critism on the verdict has been fierce, and if the Supreme Court follows it, there'll be a lot more. The Justices have already been advised to lay low, and Justice Mance had to cancel a talk on EU law due to fears for his safety. On the flip side, the Justices are pretty much the group the Brexit was a backlash against: highly educated nobility (there's not a single person amongst the 11 without a 'lord' or 'lady' title) who in several cases have relations with EU institutions and I doubt any of them weren't in the Remain camp (several have expressed pro-EU sentiments before the vote), so if they rule against the government it's not hard to view it as just another move of 'the elite' to deny the will of the people.
As the Sun's front page read: "Loaded foreign elite will defy will of Brit voters". Still more respectful than the Daily Mail, which showed portrays of the High Court Judges with names, profile, and the headline "Enemies of the people".
________________________
The EU has repeated its statement "We will not negotiate until article 50 is triggered, but we will not agree to a overly special deal for the UK" ad nauseam. Michael Barnier (The Commission's liason) gave an interview today (he spoke in English, but he answered questions in French, indicating his English hasn't become much better since his stint on the Commission). Barnier has visited 18 countries in preparation and will visit all EU capitals before Januari to complete his team.
Didier Seeuws has his task force complete but he ain't saying anything. As the Council's spokesman, he'll problably keep his lips locked since he doesn't speak until the Commission agrees on something.
Verhofstadt significantly deviated from the norm and toyed with the idea of "assossiate citizenship", a setup where not the UK government, but individual brits could pay a fee to retain their EU status. While he's of course been accused of trying to split the UK further, I'm more surprised he'd acknowledge - though not formally back - a plan that would certainly be an entirely new and very unique deal with the UK.
A group of EU experts made a "Brexit 50" list, ranking various players by expected power level. Theresa May and Angela Merkel share the top spot. Sturgeon gets 3rd for some reason, I don't know why. Barnier ranks 4th. Trump gets the 17th place, one of four non-Europeans I could identify. Full list: http://www.euractiv.com/wp-content/uplo ... xit-50.pdf Hollande is listed, which since he announced he won't be running for re-election, seems wrong also.