Just supposing the queen said....

[user1478281929]

She wanted out of EU. Could she use the royal prerogative?

Sorry about the crap ID, lurker, just joined and haven't worked out how to change it yet.

[GiddyOnZackHunt]

I suppose she could but wouldn't that provoke some massive constitutional crisis overturning centuries of consensus?

[user1478281929]

Worse than this one you mean?

[user1478281929]

Just made me think whether it could have been taken to court of appeal and been overturned by the judiciary.

[GiddyOnZackHunt]

Yes This is the stupid Cameron government's mess. But it's going to be resolved sooner or later, possibly via a GE or A50. Don't know which way though! Or whether we'll be in or out.

[VikingVolva]

Theoretically possible that the Queen could refuse assent.

But it just won't happen.

Let alone trying to impose something that did not originate from the Government.

It's so far behind the hypothetical that it's not really worth considering.

(other than to fill an idle moment on a thread, of course)

[SapphireStrange]

I dunno. I think now if ever would be the time for the Queen to make a shock intervention.

I mean, has anything as batshit as Brexit ever happened before? Nothing about it is simple, or makes sense, or comes without controversy or fights or adversarial comments and posturing.

It is by far the biggest political clusterfuck that's happened in my lifetime, and quite possibly in the Queen's.

[LordRothermereBlackshirtCunt]

Who says she wanted to leave the EU? The Sun (of all sources) quoted someone (Clegg, I think) who denied that such a conversation had ever taken place.

[prettybird]

We live in a constitutional monarchy even if we don't have a written constitution. All the judges did was implement the law and say that the Royal Prerogative (the government acting in the Queen's name) couldn't be used in this circumstance.

Last time the monarch tried to overrule parliament, it didn't end well

[garlicandsapphire]

Royal perogative or royal assent applies to the passage of law so it really depends what law you think she would be refusing to sign? What the judges said was simply that with the sovereignty of parliament which is one of our primary constitutional principles only parliament can revoke the law - Brexit will effectively require 40 - 50 laws to be rescinded. So they said the executive cannot do that without parliamentary approval. Contrary to the Daily Mail's view - this is all rather reassuring. Judges are saying only those elected Members of parliament can revoke laws - no one else. Its a fine point not the [point about whether parliament should reverse the results of the referendum which clearly they shouldn't.