The Big Picture - UK's Constitutional Crisis

Introduction

A defiant Boris Johnson hit back at the UK’s top judges and vowed to take the country out of the European Union next month, despite suffering an unprecedented legal defeat over his Brexit strategy in the highest court in the land. In a sweeping rebuke to the prime minister, Britain’s Supreme Court ruled that Johnson broke the law when he decided to suspend Parliament for five weeks in the run-up to the October 31 deadline for leaving the EU. He gave Queen Elizabeth II “unlawful" advice to pause the legislature and his decision wrecked the ability of Britain’s elected politicians to fulfill their crucial democratic role overseeing his government’s actions, the court found. Johnson said he would “obviously" respect the verdict, but retaliated immediately.

Why is this happening?

Both Johnson and his opponents in Parliament argue they’re carrying out the will of the electorate who voted in 2016 to leave the 28-nation bloc. The Prime Minister has vowed to exit the EU on Oct. 31 whether or not a transition agreement has been reached with Brussels, but a so-called “no-deal” divorce could plunge the country into chaos. Parliament has voted repeatedly to prevent that from happening. Yet, even though his party no longer commands a majority of seats in the House of Commons, Johnson has hinted he might ignore Parliament’s will and bolt from from the EU anyway.

Why are people calling this a constitutional crisis?

Britain doesn’t have a written constitution, relying instead on precedent and custom to steer its governance. That arrangement has worked well enough in normal times, but with the country and its leaders deeply divided over Brexit, the conventions are being repeatedly tested. Johnson insists that the national referendum on Brexit gives him a mandate to get the job done. For the past three years, members of Parliament have been working toward that goal, but a majority are now balking at how Johnson aims to go about it.

Where does this leave Brexit?

If the U.K. and EU don’t reach a negotiated transition agreement by Oct. 19, Parliament has required Johnson to seek an extension, likely until Jan. 31, 2020. The prime minister has promised to continue negotiating with Brussels, but has also said he’d prefer to be “dead in a ditch” than to ask for more time. Members of Parliament are worried he may try to find ways to evade the law requiring a deal. Such a move, if the government attempted it, would set up further legal battles over the power of the prime minister to evade the will of Parliament.

Where does the Queen fit in?

Perhaps the sole victory for the prime minister in the ruling was that the court wasn’t definitive that he’d lied to Queen Elizabeth II, who had to approve the suspension of Parliament at his request. The monarch stays out of politics what she thinks of Brexit isn’t known, for instance and wants to avoid being drawn into a fight. Civil servants are also duty- bound to keep her out of any political or constitutional controversy.

How does this get resolved?

With the current Parliament deadlocked over how or even whether to leave the EU, the only way out of the impasse looks to be an election that gives one party an outright majority or leads to a governing coalition. But Johnson can’t call one himself. To do that, he must either get two-thirds of lawmakers to agree to an election or lose a vote of no confidence. So far, lawmakers have refused to authorize the former, and Johnson is reluctant to risk the latter because it would give the opposition two weeks to try to form a new government.