Category: European Union
-
Richard Ekins: Representative Politics and the Limits of Law
This is the first of a series of posts in which Richard Ekins reflects upon Lord Sumption’s Reith Lectures. In his second Reith lecture, “In Praise of Politics”, broadcast on Tuesday, Jonathan Sumption aims “to make the case for the political process, with all its imperfections.” He develops a forceful argument for the capacity of…
-
Mark Elliott and Stephen Tierney: The House of Lords Constitution Committee Reports on Parliamentary Scrutiny of Treaties
The topic of parliamentary scrutiny of the making of treaties could hardly be more topical, given the role that Parliament is currently playing in relation to the Withdrawal Agreement that the UK Government is seeking to enter into with the European Union. That role arises from section 13 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018…
-
Stephanie Reynolds: Brexit and the (Not Quite) Constitutionalised Status of EU Citizenship
Since its formal introduction in the Maastricht Treaty, EU citizenship has laid claim to a constitutional status. The Union Treaties – long described by the Court of Justice as the EU’s constitutional texts – explicitly confer the status of Union citizenship on all nationals of the Member States. The asserted significance of this was subsequently…
-
Alison Young: Taking (Back) Control?
In his insightful post, David Howarth set out a conflict between two visions of democracy: Westminster and Whitehall. The Westminster vision favours Parliament (particularly the House of Commons), drawing on Parliament’s democratic credentials, the sovereignty of Parliament and the ultimate constitutional convention that a Government only holds power to the extent that it enjoys the…
-
Joseph Crampin: Precedent for Delaying Royal Assent: A Response to Professor Finnis
The ‘Cooper-Letwin Act’ (European Union Withdrawal (No 5) Act 2019) may yet come to be known as the constitutional crisis that wasn’t. But, the advocacy by some of the Government’s ability to advise the crown to refuse assent in order to legitimately prevent the Bill from becoming law has provoked significant debate. The object of…
-
Weekly round-up of events
This week’s event announcement is below. ~~~ The European Parliament (EP), Elections and Brexit: An Evening with Claude Moraes, Chairperson of the EP LIBE Committee City Law School, 23 April 2019 Event Series: Institute for the Study of European Law (ISEL) and Constitutional Law Speaker: Claude Moraes, Labour MEP for London, Chair LIBE Civil Liberties Committee of the…
-
Menelaos Markakis: A Trojan Horse in the EU? The Curious Case of the EU27+1
The EU27 have agreed to grant the extension requested by the Prime Minister, the terms of which need not be repeated here. Suffice it to say for present purposes that exit day has been moved to 31 October 2019 at the latest, subject to the proviso that an approval of the draft Withdrawal Agreement by…
-
David Howarth: Westminster versus Whitehall: Two Incompatible Views of the Constitution
Lawyers like to make as much sense as possible of the material in front of them, transforming it, if they can, from a jumble of decisions and remarks into a coherent whole. For constitutional lawyers that habit of mind is both a blessing and a curse. It is a blessing because it causes lawyers to…
-
David Vitale: Leaving the EU: A Matter of “Trust”?
Since the referendum in 2016, the Government has repeatedly justified its decisions on Brexit by invoking the concept of public trust. In December last year, the Prime Minister rejected the idea of a second referendum because, in her view, it “would do irreparable damage to the integrity of our politics, because it would say to…
-
John Finnis: Royal Assent – A Reply to Mark Elliott
I agree with Mark Elliott in finding my April 1 argument about prorogation and assent astonishing and monstrous, once the argument’s important premises have been omitted, as he has omitted them. And it is left even more objectionable when he has attributed to it a premise, two assumptions, and a goal each far from my…