To think the right wing tabloids have gone too far?

[Mistigri]

Reactions of the Mail, Express and Sun to yesterday's court decision on brexit:

The Mail's front page has a picture of the three high court judges with the headline "Enemies of the people". One judge is criticised for being "openly gay".

The Express says this is the UK's greatest crisis since the Second World War.

The Sun (proprietor: R Murdoch) takes to task the "foreign elites" who brought the case. Because their readers are less likely to approve of attacks on white pensioners (the other claimant), they focus their attack on the non-white woman claimant.

The Mail is the most problematic IMO; attacking the judiciary is another step on the road to facism.

How can we have any reasonable political debate in this environment?

*Tower [of London]

Redactio

As has been repeatedly explained the judges have not ruled on Brexit. They have simply ruled that under the constitution of the land it is parliament that can vote to trigger Art 50. The referendum was advisory because Parliament made it that way.

TheElements
X post
Guess I got caught in the next spin of the cycle

Chaz Also the cycle never seems to involve the original outraged person coming back to say "Oh, I didn't know that, thanks for enlightening me, I feel much better now."

To be honest, I don't understand why we haven't already 'BREXITED'. The Government's £9m document said they were giving the British people a vote on the matter & then they would abide by our decision. An intermediate BREXIT would have meant that we would now be well into negotiations & have an idea of what the final BREXIT will look like. This legal process is just delaying the inevitable & adding to the uncertainty. Even Labour (Lisa Nandy on Question Time) has conceded that BREXIT is going to happen & will support it if it is goes to Parliament. The House of Lords can delay it but eventually the Commons will push the legislation through. The High Court judges were bound to get attacked & receive death threats etc. People feel very strongly about the issue & unfortunately, Social Media provides an platform for people to do this under the cloak of anonymity. I just wish we would get on with it now as the uncertainty needs to end. I am sure that there will a bright future outside the EU as we are huge market for EU products (the number of German cars on the road as one example) & there is a whole world out there for us to trade outside the EU. Uncertainty is really the death knell for business so let's get on with it!

Oh dear lord, the number of German cars on the roads. Again....

YANBU. The paper that supported the Blackshirts does not surprise me, but the others did.

TheElements I think you have neatly and accurately summarised every single Brexit thread on MN !

Thank you for all that, Werkz.

I recognise exactly what you're saying about political journalists playing for the win, rather than reporting the what the public need to know. It's very irritating for the reader and really doesn't impress.

I went to a comprehensive, have signed on, and have also worked in trade journalism (looooong time ago). I'm trying to remember where my various ex-colleagues who moved into mainstream press went to school. I think grammar for the one who's now a politico (but she came from an 11-plus area without true comps, so doesn't mean a lot).

Sorry, I mean, As a reader I recognise the political journalists playing for the win. It's immensely tedious.

flippinada

If it is legal to have a referendum, how is it legal to ignore the result? The EU has form in that though.
Either we are a democracy or we are not.
There are plenty of posters upthread who are prepared to jump through intellectual hoops because their point of view did not prevail.
Let me remind the patronising twunts.
In June of this year the people of the UK voted to leave the EU.
Judges should support this decision.

Redactio, this judgement does support that decision!

It's clarifying the legal procedure that will has to be followed. Because it emerged on the morning after the referendum that no-one actually knew.

Pausing
We all know that the court case was about overriding the referendunm result. It is disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

We all know that the court case was about overriding the referendunm result.

Except it's not.

Redactio Because they weren't asked to rule on the people's decision.

Redactio, here's an explanation from FullFact, an independent charity: Ask Full Fact: Brexit in court

There's a more up-to-date, good, clear explanation from the BBC, Brexit court ruling: Your questions answered

YANBU.
Leave voters voted to take back control of our laws and the border. I hope that thesee newspapers have finally crossed the line yesterday after which it becomes obvious to people that they were lied to. Blimey, if our courts aren't trustworthy, where once nthe universe are we going to find a trustworthy system? We are a first world country.

how is it legal to ignore the result?

Because by definition a referendum is advisory, not binding.
People really didn't have a clue what the vote was about, didn't they?!
I vote on propositions and ballot measures in the USA. Those actually are BINDING. Don't get those in UK.

Previous referenda that have been ignored (so far) are many. Few yrs ago Switzerland referendum decided that immigration would be limited; this has led to zero changes in the law so far.

Redactio the ruling is NOT about stopping Brexit. The ruling was on the question of whether Article 50 can be invoked by royal preogative, i.e by the Prime Minister just deciding to invoke it. The answer is that it can't. Invoking article 50 means taking us out of the EU. We were taken into the EU by an Act of Parliament, therefore we must be taken out of it by an Act of Parliament, not just the Prime Minister's say so.
It is not undemocratic, in fact it is the very definition of democracy: parliament debating the conditions for a change to our rights and constitution.

These are all really basic things, people really have no clue about democracy, do they?

People need to learn about sovereignty. A referendum is advisory, not legally binding.

I haven't RTFT because I don't think my blood pressure could take it but YANBU.

Redactio the court judgement isn't about stoping Brexit, I wish it was but it wasn't. It was about not being able to remove rights from the people of the U.K. without an act of parliament having been passed because we have a parliamentary democracy. I may hope it leads to a softer Brexit but that isn't certain. It is really important that we have a judiciary that is independent of politicians, it helps keep us all safe in the long run. I have lived in a developing country where this didn't happen and it really isn't good for average people.

And there you hVe it...redacto appears typical of many (but not all) folk who voted Brexit. Totally unable to understand this ruling...she/he thinks it means the Judges saying we can't Brexit despite swathes of people explaining in simple terms that this is NOT what it meant.

We will still have Brexit but it will be done as an Act of Parliment. What the big fucking deal about that? Who cares as long as it is done properly.