DH (remainer) thinks a re-vote is not constitutional
Whether you DH is a remainer or not is irrelevant. This is not a leave/remain debate, despite what so many posters here seem to think.
The question is whether a 2nd referendum is constitutional or not. Not whether Remain / Leave would win.
Another referendum probably would not be a 're-vote' anyway because it most likely would ask a fundamentally different question.
To say its 'not constitutional' shows your DH knows fuck all about law and constitutional matters. He also knows fuck all about democracy and democratic principles.
Democracy is an ongoing conversation where ideas and support for ideas is a constantly shifting thing.
The referendum was also hugely flawed for a huge number of reasons (involving both remain and leave sides), and it asked a question that was incredibly vague leaving it open to interpretation and the result open to abuse.
There are Leavers who feel betrayed and that what they voted for is not being delivered. Among them are people who were part of the official Vote Leave campaign.
Remember that key Brexiteers like Boris Johnson and Daniel Hannan, said that leaving the EU was not leaving the Single Market. They promised we could have our cake and eat it. They continued to do that after the referendum. Now that's beginning to unravel.
This is important, given that May's Brexit vision, is to leave the Single Market, the Customs Union and the ECJ.
That's not something that has been democratically approved by the British Public. In many ways the referendum result is becoming increasingly meaningless and not necessarily reflective of the opinion of the British Public.
The referendum result is NOT legally binding. So said the Supreme Court. This is part of the problem. That's why we have had legal challenges because the constitutional matters surrounding the referendum was not properly addressed when the Referendum Act was created.
The referendum result is technically politically binding. This is categorically different. Politics unlike law are not fixed. They are subject to changing much more frequently and easily.
I give you think fine twitter thread, which points out that political mandates are finite and do not last indefinitely.
Simon the Stylite*@Sime0nStylites*
1. Amidst the No Deal furore, I’m reminded of Eddie Mair’s very fine question to Amber Rudd.
2. “How long does the referendum remit last?” (A question which AR struggled to answer).
3. You can divide the question into 2 parts: (i) Brexit itself (ii) the shape of Brexit.
4. (i) is easier to answer. The govt has a mandate to leave the EU that until we do or it’s the “will of the people” that we don’t.
5. (Important point - the referendum was about leaving; it said nothing about rejoining.)
6. (ii) Is more difficult. Let’s be clear, there is little if any democratic mandate for the “shape” of Brexit.
7. Many people said many things during the ref campaign - Project Fear, SM yes/no, Switzerland, Sunlit Uplands, £350m for the NHS etc.
8. Argue what u will about what either side said, the question was Leave v Remain not Leave - How. The question said nothing about “shape”.
9. The closest we have to democratic validation of “shape” is Lanc Hse and then the subsequent GE.
10. If the GE had returned a Cons majority, then the govt could have asserted that it had a democratic mandate for its Brexit “shape’.
11. But it didn’t (although a weaker case can be made as a result of the alliance with the DUP).
12. But even if the govt did have a Lanc Hse mandate, what happens if that Brexit “shape” is unachievable?
13. Important to remember that Lanc Hse had 2 limbs - the 3 Red Lines AND a Deep/Frictionless trade arrangement.
If your DH thinks a 're-vote' is unconstitutional, then does he think the SNP's main political goal is unconstitutional?
As for causing uproar, it depends on a) what the question for a referendum was b) what the political atmosphere of the country was by that point.
Today sees the Times with a poll from YouGov with a significant change in responses to whether Brexit is right or wrong. It could be an outlier. It could be a flawed poll. We need more to see if a pattern is emerging. I would be surprised if it was wrong though for various reasons.
If this trend was to continue then the political atmosphere might be very different to it was in June 2016. And the outcome of a referendum asking a different question, might be highly desirable to STOP outrage.
Above all else, a referendum will only occur if it is politically acceptable and beneficial to have one.
Your DH is not very good at understanding political concepts. He probably has other strengths. This isn't one. You should explain why.
Part of the reason we are currently in such a mess in this country is because not enough people understand these concepts and have swallowed the bullshit of politicians trying to cover their arses by redefining why they don't have to listen to public opinion properly, whilst they pursue their own agendas.
In a democracy, those you elect are supposed to listen to opinions and changes in those opinions as representatives. You reserve the right to change your mind, when given additional information. MPs have the power to reflect this, and this is not undemocratic. Indeed, its the exact opposite.