We are now less than two months away from the current Brexit deadline of 31st October but the announcements over the last few days from 10 Downing Street mean that it is unlikely Parliament will be able to fully utilise that remaining time.

Firstly, in spite of the threat to democratic debate and the prospect of a constitutional crisis the decision was made to prorogue Parliament for five weeks. Then this evening Boris Johnson made it clear that he was going all-in on the ‘No Deal’ option by announcing that there would likely be a snap election if Parliament took that off the table. The practical effect of this would also be to close the doors of Parliament for an even greater period of time.

The reactions to the latest saga in this perpetual crisis have been as predictable as they have been divisive. For many Brexiteers this has persuaded them that the only way to leave the EU is without a deal at the end of October. Meanwhile for Remainers we have seen protests on the streets, petitions and legal action.

So far that legal action to prevent the prorogation of Parliament has fallen somewhat flat as the Scottish proceedings drag on while the English case has not yet even began. This should not be too surprising to hear as the courts are always loath to involve themselves in something so explicitly political and the argument rests on somewhat shaky legal ground given that the basis for the claim drives against some of the core principles of judicial review.

The other legal story to note from the past few days is the implication that the government would choose to simply ignore an Act of Parliament. Unlike the judicial review case there is really no precedent for this whatsoever and in a constitutional system that depends on Parliamentary supremacy this truly would upset the apple cart. The resolution to such a cataclysmic state of affairs is unclear and varies from Boris bullying his way through regardless to the establishment of an alternative assembly.

Once again though it seems that the courts would not really have a role. It is true that they uphold Parliamentary supremacy in each and every case they hear but there is a big step between that and compelling a Minister to actively follow what is required in a piece of legislation.

It is stunning for a legal commemorator to have to say this but the room for the courts and even the law in general is dissipating as all of this comes to a head. What we are dealing with now is an almost purely political crisis whereby the government, Parliamentarians, the media and the people across the country will some way, some how decide the fate of this country before October is through.