‘One Day At A Time’ Was Canceled By Netflix & Twitter Is Now In Mourning

Today isn’t a good day for fans of One Day At A Time. On Thursday, March 14, Netflix officially announced that One Day At A Time has been canceled, and will not be renewed for Season 4. Netflix announced the news on social media, and Twitter reacted to the One Day At A Time cancellation with sadness, anger, and a lot of GIFs.

"We’ve made the very difficult decision not to renew One Day At A Time for a fourth season," Netflix tweeted. "The choice did not come easily — we spent several weeks trying to find a way to make another season work but in the end simply not enough people watched to justify another season."

The news followed a push by fans on Twitter to keep the reboot of the ’70s sitcom alive, but ultimately, it didn’t work. In a series of tweets, Netflix thanked creator Norman Lear, the cast, and the show’s executive producers Gloria Calderon Kellett and Mike Royce "for always making us laugh and never shying away from bravely and beautifully tackling tough subject matter in a meaningful way."

Netflix ended this sad note with a message to fans who found a kinship with this Cuban-American family. "And to anyone who felt seen or represented — possibly for the first time — by ODAAT," Netflix tweeted, "please don’t take this as an indication your story is not important. The outpouring of love for this show is a firm reminder to us that we must continue finding ways to tell these stories."

Still, fans were sad to hear that the show they loved would not be returning for another season.

More to come…

Source: Read Full Article

Britain can cancel Brexit and stay in EU forever without asking Europe's permission, Euro judges rule

The European Court of Justice issued a decision saying that Article 50 can be revoked by the UK without permission from European leaders.

That means that at any time before we officially leave the EU in March, the British Government could simply decide to stay permanently.

Pro-Remain politicians jumped on the verdict as a way of overturning the EU referendum result.

Last week the ECJ's top legal adviser declared that Britain could revoke Article 50 – the mechanism which officially started the process of Brexit.

Today the court confirmed that it would follow that advice in a final verdict issued just one day before Parliament is due to vote on Theresa May's Brexit deal.

The judgment will embolden pro-EU MPs, suggesting that if they vote against the withdrawal agreement tomorrow they will have a chance of forcing through a second referendum.

The SNP's Stewart McDonald crowed: "It is now indisputably the case that the PM’s deal is not the only option – we can change course and remain."

And Nigel Farage blasted: "The collusion to stop Brexit continues."

Speaking minutes after the judgment was issued, Michael Gove insisted it would not make a re-run of the 2016 vote any more likely.

The Environment Secretary told the BBC: "We voted very clearly – 17.4million people sent a clear message that we wanted to leave the European Union and that means also leaving the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice.

"So, this case is all very well but it doesn't alter either the referendum vote or the clear intention of the Government to make sure that we leave on March 29."

Mrs May will hope that the verdict scares her pro-Brexit MPs into voting for her deal in order to avoid an outcome which leaves Britain in the EU permanently.

The ECJ concluded that Article 50 can be revoked by Britain at any time before the UK and EU agree a withdrawal agreement, or before the exit date of March 29 if there is no Brexit deal.

But the UK won't be able to rejoin the EU after Brexit without getting permission from the other 27 European leaders.

The court said: "The revocation must be decided following a democratic process in accordance with national constitutional requirements.

"This unequivocal and unconditional decision must be communicated in writing to the European Council.

"Such as revocation confirms the EU membership of the member state concerned under terms that are unchanged as regards its status as a member state and brings the withdrawal procedure to an end."

Eurocrats were accused of scheduling today's verdict deliberately close to the Commons vote on the deal as a way of undermining Mrs May.

Source: Read Full Article

Britain could CANCEL Brexit without having to ask the EU, Euro court rules

A top ECJ official delivered his bombshell verdict after a group of pro-EU politicians challenged the claim that the UK can only cancel Brexit with the consent of the other 27 member states.

Spanish lawyer Campos Sánchez-Bordona, the court's advocate general, rejected Brussels' insistence any revocation must be unanimously approved by EU capitals, saying Britain has a "sovereign" right to change its mind.

His opinion represents non-binding guidance and still requires a full ruling by a panel of judges, but it is common for the Luxembourg court to follow the advocate general's initial advice.

It will give a huge boost to MPs campaigning for a second referendum, who can now claim Britain could cancel Brexit without the EU attaching fresh demands such as cancelling the rebate in return for allowing us back into the club.

Brexiteers responded with fury – Nigel Farage blasted: "Every effort is being made on both sides of the Channel to stop Brexit."

Labour's Tulip Siddiq, a backer of the pro-EU Best for Britain campaign, gloated: "Article 50 can be revoked and this self-inflicted mess can be unilaterally ended. All options must now be firmly on the table, and that includes a people’s vote."

And anti-Brexit Tory Dominic Grieve added that the opinion is "certainly helpful" to the cause of those who want to stay in the EU.

In a statement, the court said: "The Advocate General proposes that the Court of Justice should, in its future judgment, declare that Article 50 TEU allows the unilateral revocation of the notification of the intention to withdraw from the EU.

"The Advocate General emphasises that withdrawal from an international treaty, which is the reverse of a treaty-making power, is by definition a unilateral act of a state party and a manifestation of its sovereignty.

"Unilateral revocation would also be a manifestation of the sovereignty of the departing member state, which chooses to reverse its initial decision."

But the opinion said Article 50 – which Mrs May used to announce formally that Britain is leaving – can't be revoked after the withdrawal agreement is signed, and would also require "parliamentary approval" in the UK.

Jolyon Maugham, a Remain backing lawyer who helped bring the case, said a judgement along the same lines would "put the decision about our future back into the hands of our own elected representatives where it belongs".

Ahead of next Tuesday's Commons vote on Theresa May's Brexit deal, he added: "On this critical issue I'm sure MPs will now search their consciences and act in the best interests of the country."

Source: Read Full Article