One salient feature of this year’s electoral season has been the resurgence of populism as a potent political force. This came as a shock to many in the United States, but if we look elsewhere in the world we will find that ours is not an isolated case. Last spring, the United Kingdom (U.K.) saw a similar wave of populist resentment sweep the nation in the “Brexit” vote in which the U.K. bid an unceremonious “adieu” to the European Union (E.U.). The unexpected nature and tremendous consequences of that vote have drawn obvious comparisons to our own situation and, for that reason, it might be helpful to look to the U.K.’s handling of Brexit in considering how America moves forward from this election.
The big issue currently facing the U.K. government is how it can obey the will of the people by leaving the E.U. while also following proper constitutional procedure. A recent High Court ruling has thrown a wrench in the government’s plan to start negotiations with other E.U. nations by requiring Parliament’s approval before it can begin. It is a complicated issue. Basically, Prime Minister Theresa May had planned on negotiating the terms of Brexit under the powers of royal prerogative that give Her Majesty’s Government the power to make decisions regarding international treaties. This is how May and her cabinet intended to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty and trigger the exit from the E.U. in accordance with the will of the majority of citizens.
But the court’s ruling asserted the sovereignty of Parliament over any action that would affect the rights of citizens. And because Brexit revokes certain rights granted to U.K. citizens under the 1972 European Communities Act, it is necessary for Parliament to give its approval before any negotiations take place. The government had already planned on repealing that act in Parliament, but would have only done so near the end of negotiations to finalize the formal split. In effect, this ruling has allowed Parliament to get involved at the beginning of the process, giving members of parliament a greater say regarding the terms of the U.K.’s exit.
Not many people believe that Parliament will not go through with Brexit at this point. But the ruling does raise some very interesting questions about the role of popular sovereignty not only in the U.K., but anywhere else where the will of the majority bristles against the established rule of law. It is important that constitutional norms are followed, but at the same time Parliament must do its best to respect the will of the people as it promised to do before the vote, no matter how much individual members may oppose the outcome.
The problem with the Brexit vote is that it did not really do an adequate job of expressing the will of the people regarding the terms of the exit from the E.U. The Leave campaign made some misleading promises they knew they couldn’t keep and it appears that those tasked with executing the exit are now the targets of populist resentment. In the event that Brexit doesn’t significantly affect Britain’s immigration levels or remove it from the European common market, it is precisely the politicians who made these promises that will pay the price for betraying the will of the people.
And lest we think that this is only Westminster’s problem, we should remember that the popular mandate to exit the E.U. was not really the will of the U.K. as a whole, but more like the will of England and Wales against the protestations of Scotland and Northern Ireland. In a union already strained by multiple rounds of devolution and the 2014 Scottish independence referendum, this divide makes the future of the U.K. even more uncertain. Nicola Sturgeon and the Scottish nationalists are already threatening to hold another referendum should the terms of the exit be unfavorable to the parliament in Edinburgh. So in addition to a crisis of legitimacy surrounding its political institutions, the U.K. may be facing an even more pressing threat to its continued existence.
All of these issues may be specific to the U.K., but they can nonetheless serve as a warning to America, which has now seen the same populist forces wreak havoc on an election of its own. Whatever you may think of Trump’s victory, it is hard to deny the importance of the forces he has unleashed in American politics. The will of the people has triumphed over every convention that would normally have prevented this outcome. If we consider the health of democracy at the moment, we can certainly find some good and some bad. It is at once encouraging to see the will of the people prevail and also very alarming to consider its possible impact on the rule of law in this country. We would do well to consider how this has played out following the Brexit vote, and hopefully learn a thing or two about how to deal with the new realities of populism in America.