[Roger Slater]

Was there ever a vote on a no-deal Brexit? Or did the electorate and everyone assume that there would be a negotiated Brexit?

At any rate, I presume that the MPs in Parliament were also elected by a democratic vote, and a more recent one, so there's nothing undemocratic about any lawful steps they take, though there's certainly something undemocratic about trying to shut down Parliament in a manner that a unanimous Supreme Court found to be illegal.

[David Anthony]

No, the vote was simply whether to leave or remain. It was up to the government to negotiate the terms of departure, which would be bound to be very detailed and take a number of years following any withdrawal agreement.
The MPs were elected by a democratic vote, but if they are Labour or Conservative they subscribed to their party manifestos to honour the referendum result; so it's surprising how many are now declining to honour it, and in so doing losing their democratic legitimacy.
The government's decision to prorogue (which was based on advice by the attorney general) was upheld by the high court, led by the highest judge in the land, but was held illegal by the supreme court in a decision which does not follow but makes new law.

[Rick Mullin]

An opinion piece in the New York Times.

[David Anthony]

Impressively balanced and intelligent article.

[Roger Slater]

I'm not sure why you'd call it "balanced," since it strikes me as entirely one-sided. This is not to say it is wrong, but there's no "on the one hand" and "on the other hand" sense one takes away from it.

[Max Goodman]

An opinion piece in the New York Times.

"Tuesday’s decision... was reminiscent of Bush v. Gore"? Really? Bush v. Gore was a partisan 5-4 ruling, with the conservatives outnumbering the liberals. This decision was unanimous.

[John Isbell]

What Max said. The op ed also remarks that many “entertainers “ and such like want to stop Brexit. Funny, I had the impression that a majority of U.K. citizens would now like to stop it. I suspect the op ed writer may find that data point inconvenient, much as they find echoes of Bush v. Gore, weirdly, in a unanimous decision. Perhaps balanced is precisely the mot juste, since it’s the famous motto of Fox News.

Cheers,
John

[Ann Drysdale]

Many of us have been enjoying the thought "Never mind, Boris - you can still refer it to the European Court of Justice."

But it isn't funny. Not any more.

Listening to Boris in Parliament I feel he knows exactly what he is doing. He is arming his fan-base with soundbites. If he should be thwarted in his attempt to "do Brexit", I have a deep fear that great numbers of less well-informed Leave voters would react violently, even at a local level. They have been primed by elements of the tabloid press. It would only take a spark.

That was a factor, I believe, that Corbyn was taking into consideration with his proposal, which includes further negotiation and a second referendum. It implies respect for the electorate. It would still give the Leavers an equal voice and the Remainers, even if outvoted, the consolation of leaving with an honestly-negotiated deal. Otherwise "Bella, horrida bella, et Sabrinam multo spumantem sanguine cerno".

[John Isbell]

Ditto over here, where Trump has threatened publicly and explicitly that there will be violence if he is impeached. How vile is that. It seems to be the new playbook. These demagogic politicians are to my mind quite clearly a cancer on the body politic. For Trump, I believe the remedy is prison.

Cheers,
John