What the hell does this election result mean for Brexit?

By on

Social media rush as lawyers debate hung parliament’s impact

Lawyers of Twitter are head in hands this morning, as they mull over what a hung parliament means for the Brexit process.

Article 50 was triggered in March, signalling the formal beginning of our withdrawal from the European Union. Weeks later, Prime Minister Theresa May called a snap general election, hoping to strengthen her hand in our Brexit negotiations. It didn’t really go to plan.

Now, lawyers have flocked to social media to explain what this result means for the United Kingdom’s Brexit negotiations — and it’s not good.

To summarise an informative Twitter thread by legal journalist and solicitor David Allen Green, Article 50 is a “formal legal step” which sets off a two-year Brexit countdown. This window of negotiations can be extended if all other EU Member States agree, but this is “not easy”. He continued:

Other lawyers agreed with Green that the whole thing is “a mess”. Garden Court Chambers’ Colin Yeo commented:

The head of Durham Law School went for:

Like Green, Cambridge professor Kenneth Armstrong reminded tweeters that the Brexit clock is ticking. He commented:

While one barrister from Manchester set 9 St John Street said:

With all this Brexit confusion floating around, the profession is in a bit of a muddle. We wouldn’t be surprised if others echoed barrister Adam Wagner’s thoughts:

For all the latest commercial awareness info, and advance notification of Legal Cheek’s careers events, sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub here.



A second referendum would be fantastic.

“Brexit means Brexit” – Uh, not necessarily if we have a second referendum. It would be a resounding remain result now that the younger voters have woken up (and a few of the old voters that signed away the hopes of their grandchildren have now passed away).

May is a complete idiot for trying to cling on. She is a spoiled brat who is used to getting her way. She has no idea that nobody wants it her way.


Whoa there!

Just because a few vocal people on twitter want a second referendum doesn’t mean it will happen.

Even Labour are committed to delivering Brexit. The only question is how watered down it will now have to be.

This was a GE primarily on HOW brexit would be delivered now IF it would be delivered. That was last June my old chum.



The political parties are only committing to Brexit because it would be suicide as a political party not to. That doesn’t make it right and it is a shame because we are now going down a road that well over half the country, now, do not really want us to go down.



Oh? Who made you arbiter of what’s good for people?



Exactly, that’s the sort of self-righteous attitude of the metropolitan/political elites that got us Brexit and Trump elected.


Just Anonymous

I’m sorry, but there is absolutely no mandate for a second Brexit referendum.

Labour explicitly accepted, during the campaign, that Brexit is happening, and they ran on that basis. Their contention with the Conservatives was over HOW Brexit should happen.

Put simply, even if Labour had won a landslide majority, that would still give them absolutely no mandate whatsoever for seeking to remain in the European Union.


Air Hair Lair

There was never a Mandate for Brexit, it was not a mandatory referendum.
If it had been there would have been rules against the blatant lying, the abscence of any kind of plan or costings, and the 52% majority would not have mandated a Leave decision.

We need a Poliical solution to this. Why are the politicians acting as if they must carry out Brexit at ANY cost? Are their lives , or those of their loved ones under threat?



Totally agreed, it is ridiculous. The issue is, political parties know if they don’t go through with it then they risk massively alienating those who voted leave. It is much easier to appease the remain voters by spurting out the “Brexit means Brexit” and “must honour the vote” lingo. Despite the fact it is ludicrous.



We had the vote.

You lost.

Get over it!


Whoa there!

*This was a GE primarily on HOW brexit would be delivered not IF it would be delivered.



Isn’t that the same question voiced two different ways?

What is Brexit? What is the minimum that satisfies the criteria of Brexit?

The Tories still have not told us this, a year after the referendum.

Sure, they say that they will leave the single market and the customs union, but then Davies says well have exactly the same rights and opportunites as if we were in the EU. These things don’t really go together in a coherent way.



Theresa May, would you put a limit (if any at all) on the amount of Brexit damage that would be tolerated before you could admit publicly that Brexit is a dangerous, inoperable fantasy? What might that limit be? Perhaps …

10 million children in poverty? 5 million sleeping rough? Scrapped NHS and welfare?
Closed banks? Mass unemployment ? Pension and wage cuts? GDP worse than Greece? Nationwide food shortages & rationing? Power cuts? Riots and looting in the streets?

It is not a casual question. I genuinely want to gauge the full extent of your insanity.


Quintessentially British

We are in quite a pickle!



Oh well, mustn’t grumble. I’m off to join a lovely queue for some jam and gingham table cloths.



Will those items be measured in metric or imperial measures?



I don’t think that we can comment on political matters without the permission of illustrious poster Not Amused



Theresa May has played a blinder.

Last year she opposed Brexit. Getting herself elected PM was the first step towards achieving her purpose to remain.

Triggering Article 50 and then calling an election which she has scraped through was a masterstroke.

The UK will NOT be leaving the EU. Theresa has made sure of that.


Corbyn. Sympathiser

Yes I too think leading your party to humiliation in the face of Jam Grandad is a great victory.



Point of accuracy- THIRD referendum. It’s 1-1 at the moment.



The scales have fallen from my eyes, I see it now and how wrong I have been. There must be another referendum and we must vote to remain. I am sorry for being such an insufferable arse for all this time.



I am sorry too. I won’t mention disabled people ever again!


Helping Hand

Disabled people should get more than one vote. It is only right to redress the balance against them.



I couldn’t agree more. I now love Corbyn with all my heart. I am sorry for trolling you all. I love you all.


Smooth Peanut Butter

I love you too. For who you are, and also for your body. I probably think about your body more though. But then again, who doesn’t?


Air Hair Lair

Pleased you’re on our side now.
You never did mention one tangible benefit of Brexit, did you?


Corbyn. Sympathiser

I don’t think you are the real Not Amused.



Really? Ask me a question that only Not Amused would know the answer to?



Who are better, poor born kids or non-poor born kids?



The Answer is IMMIGRATION… see its me.



The Demon of Downing St



Ha, never mind ‘Coalition of Chaos’, how about ‘Tragedy of the Tories’, with the ‘Dimwits of the DUP’!?


Andrew F.

The raw appeal of sincerity and goodwill propelled Corbyn to an impressive measure of electoral success. Young people saw a stark difference between that honesty of approach and the ‘strong and stable’ drivel of a strangely unpleasant, evasive woman with seemingly a motorbike padlock chain around her neck – that expensive and ugly bling an unsubtle intimation of wealth and power. But it was the unassuming Corbyn who energised the young vote, inspiring them with a positive social message to vote for their own future.

In contrast, the dishonesty of the Tories is legendary. The £35m lie on the bus, ‘nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market’, ‘no downside to Brexit’, Gove’s denial of leadership ambition, May’s emphatic ruling out of an early election, and so on. Why bother to listen to any Tory who is disconnected from a lie detector? What is the point?

The rag bag DUP will not save Theresa May’s scalp. She is the flat joke that has been told too many times. She should go now before her stupidities embarrass the country any further.



The £35m lie on the bus…

It wasn’t a £35m lie, it was a £350m lie. But to be fair, it wasn’t a Tory lie, it was a LEAVE lie – although it is possible that one of those liars may soon be leader of the Conservatives.

Can anyone imagine it, Boris as PM!? As Yoda would say ‘F*cked, you are’.


Andrew F.

Shameful of me to understate such an bold and impressive deception. The bus lie was indeed 10x bigger and better than stated and it was an ‘off duty’ Tory creation for Leave.

Boris the Eton Tory boy for PM? Beam me up, Mr Spock.


Air Hair Lair

Getting lively now isn’t it?

EU won’t negotiate with a minority govt. When the DUP thing falls apart …. I mean , really, will she stop at nothing? Re-unification of Ireland? War with the IRA again? Just so we can offer an unregulated playground, a tax haven with no human rights laws for the world’s super villains? Include ‘advisor to the Govt ‘ Mr P May, we find out how much he earns out of it v soon!

Anyway, Brexit happens if the EU say it happens. They may say “Ok , leave, pay us our money and go negotiate with WTO! You’ll make Cuba look like the Canary Islands!


Air Hair Lair

Best result in the election for me was Kensington going for Labour!
Not a Blair Labour, but a proper Take from the Rich and Give To The Poor, Nationalise Transport Labour!

Just two more things:

Hope May doesn’t resign , because she is Hopeless!
( sacked the advisors who brought you the Nazi manifesto, but the manifesto still stands!)

Even the Flat Earthers in the DUP realise May’s Brexit is batshit crazy!



Old territory, but I thought Article 50 notification required constitutional compliance for it to be actionable. When was a formal ‘decision’ made to leave the EU? We have the ‘advice’ of an advisory referendum that was non-binding and weightless in law – mandatory only in a politically convenient sense – but not a formal ‘decision’ from a legally binding referendum or a parliamentary vote on EU membership.

How has the Article 50 requirement for constitutional compliance been satisfied?



The TDUPs haha she didn’t see that coming. I understand there’s no coalition just confidence votes but this is not sustainable surely? what happens next?


Corbyn. Sympathiser

I’m sure you realise that a loose agreement with open homophobes, misogynists, religious fanatics and terrorist lovers is actually Strong And Stable Government, brought to you by Theresa May. For now.



I await huge coverage in the Daily Mail, Sun and Express about Theresa May’s new friends in the DUP – a party endorsed by several murderous paramilitary groups. Plenty to write about their terrorist links, quite apart from their corruption, bigotry, misogyny, homophobia and creationism. Nice people to get into bed with to save your political skin, Mrs May?

If the gutter press thought Corbyn’s peacemaking overtures with the IRA twenty years ago were worth blanket smear coverage on June 9th , we should see acres of print soon on Theresa’s brand new allies and their terrorist connections. What’s sauce for the goose …



I’ve loved watching this unfold. The funniest part is that, since the DUP is the largest party in NI, all of you criticising May’s alliance with them are also heavily disparaging the NI electorate’s democratic choice. Additionally, those who were fine with Corbyn’s views on certain terrorist organisations, previously, have no right to now get aggravated with May’s DUP fraternisation. It’s hypocrisy. If you want to criticise, you still have to criticise both Corbyn and May on equal grounds.

To be honest, I hope Corbyn does get his wish and somehow ousts May and forms his own minority government. A government which will require four party support, has promised the world to it’s voters, and is headed up by a man who before his leadership flirtation held a seat that has been Labour since 1930s. The ensuing disaster will probably destroy Labour for a very long time.



If the Irish electorate choose tunnel-visioned religious bigots who think women have no right to control their own bodies and who persecute others for being born with a different sexuality, the exercise of democratic process does not render such intolerance acceptable. By your logic Trump’s racism, democratically voted for by masses of white supremacists like the Ku Klux Klan, would likewise be sanitised by democratic process. Clearly it is not!

Some 20 years ago, Corbyn did meet with the IRA and with Loyalists to pursue peaceful settlement (as did Margaret Thatcher’s administration). Theresa May, on the contrary, has only the base motivation of personal gain in cosying up with the terrorist-linked UDP – and has no hesitation in risking a rekindling of sectarian violence in the process. Ask yourself, how many votes can Corbyn muster in the Commons from the IRA? How many votes can May gain from the Loyalists? They are very different leaders pursuing a very different moral path and there is no hypocrisy at all in the exclusively Tory criticism.

‘The ensuing disaster will probably destroy’ … the Tory Party. Their hand is at the wheel of the Brexit Titanic as it sails inexorably toward the iceberg. All Jeremy Corbyn has to do is munch his popcorn and watch this grossly antisocial Tory Party publicly self-destruct.


Comments are closed.