Brexit: Judicial Review, Parliamentary Sovereignty and Referendum

In a referendum, the people of the United Kingdom (UK) voted to leave the European Union (EU.) Some aspects of this process have been reviewed by the national Supreme Court (UKSC.) In trying to understand the role of judicial review in the Brexit referendum, the paper argues that the opinion expressed by citizens in a referendum has not been subjected to judicial review; instead, the paper explains, what has been judicially reviewed are two issues: one regarding the role the Government and Parliament have in the post-referendum proceedings. The second issue that has been reviewed is whether the subnational legislatures of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have jurisdiction on the Brexit proceedings. Empirically, Brexit provides evidence to understand both, contemporary challenges of judicial review and the limits of a counter-majoritarian function in the British polity. This evidence matters when the debate on the democratic legitimacy of judicial review is examined. The paper is based on a qualitative analysis of parliamentary debates and judicial rulings, as well as on-line version of newspapers and relevant documents.