UK human rights law is controversial. In particular, the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) and its associated case-law has attracted sharp media and political criticism – not least because of how the HRA incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law. This debate has rumbled on with varying degrees of intensity since the late 2000s. At the time of writing, it is relatively quiescent, having been obscured by the complexity of the great Brexit imbroglio. However, it is likely to flare up in the not too distant future: post-Brexit, the HRA/ECHR’s impact on UK law will inevitably continue to be a political sore point. As a result, HRA/ECHR enthusiasts need to be ready to defend the current state of UK human rights law in the changed circumstances of a post-Brexit Britain. This chapter examines the standard arguments made by defenders of the HRA/ECHR from a critical realist perspective, and identifies their strengths and weaknesses as rhetorical devices being deployed in the current political climate. It concludes that HRA/ECHR enthusiasts need to focus on arguments that ‘sell’ the virtues of the current legal status quo to a sceptical public, rather than appealing to status, authority and expertise as has often been the case hitherto. There are signs that this lesson is beginning to sink in – but there is a long road ahead.