In fresh news the suspension as been overturned and ruled as unlawful. They'll all be back tomorrow.
The Judicial branch effectively overruled the Executive, stated he essentially broke the law, lied to the Queen and attempted to subvert democracy. To my knowledge this hasn't happened before.
Last time the Executive got overruled like this was Charles I, and that didn't end well for him
In other words the situation continues to be a carnival
It's worse than the Judicial Branch overruling the executive. The Judicial Branch directly ruled that the Queen can't do something. This despite the fact that, legally, all of the Judicial power is derived direct from the Monarch and under british law, convention, and tradition it is actually impossible for the Queen to violate the law.
Boris Johnson did not, legally speaking, projure Parliament. Boris Johnson went to the Queen and advised her to do so. The Queen decided to listen to his advice and use her power to projure Parliament.
The courts just went and effectively said that the Queen doesn't actually have that power, that the Prime Minister does, and then said that the Prime Minister used it unlawfully.
Although, hopefully, once all this is done and over with the UK will finally sit down and actually get a written Constitution that can't be changed at the simple whims of Parliament and explicitly lays out what powers various entities have (the Queen, the PM, Parliament, the Courts, Scotland/NI/England/etc.).
Parliament does have the power to seek an extension and likely will some time in October, they'll force a vote even if the PM objects and the result becomes law. The PM wanted to avoid this by shutting parliament, this has failed, so a vote is likely.
Losing such a vote, which seems likely, on top of this is going to ruin Boris but he may stick around until an election. Probably soon. Right now it looks probable Brexit isn't happening before next year. Assuming Parliament votes as expected.
The fundamental problem in all of this is how close the Brexit vote was. It offered a mandate but not a very solid one especially as neither side was entirely up front about the ramifications. There is reasonable doubt that a second vote would give a different result, but not necessarily the result those pushing for it seek.
Legally, Parliament doesn't actually have that power. Legally, all British foreign policy is done under the Monarchs reserved powers (as used by the Prime Minister). While Parliament's consent is required to make a treaty binding or the like, they don't actually have
any legal authority to negotiate or interact with foreign entities. That is the remit of the Monarch (acting through/by the Prime Minister).
Of course, Bercow is staunchly anti-Brexit (especially No Deal Brexit) and is blatantly and repeatedly breaking written law, convention, and tradition to let Parliament do whatever it can to slow/halt the process.
BoJo lied to Her Majesty in order to make the Crown complicit in a dubious political maneuver that probably hurt Brexit far more than it could have helped. Regardless of anything else, lying to the monarch ought to be a total disgrace of the leader of the Conservative Party, as a gross violation of all the traditions it supposedly exists to defend. He should fall on his sword but that's hardly likely so the farce will continue on to Britain's detriment.
As for Brexit itself given the obvious divisions and inability to determine what terms Britain should seek to leave on going back to the voters is the only course left to break the deadlock. A general election in it's own ought to be enough if the Tories win or, rather improbably, the LibDms win; and Labour committed itself to another referendum. Let the matter be settled by the public now rather than by interminable legislative trench-fighting and dirty tricks.
Whether or not BoJo lied to Her Majesty should have been legally irrelevant. The Queen technically has the authority, on her own, to projure parliament. As a matter of tradition she only does so when the PM requests it but, under the plain letter of the law, the PM doesn't actually have any legal roll in the process. Legally, the Queen decided to projure parliament (upon the advice of her Prime Minister, which she is not actually legally obligated to accept or act on).
This entire court case was almost as farcical as Bercow deciding that Queens Assent wasn't needed for the last Brexit law (despite the fact that it directly affects royal prerogatives).
Look there is not going to be a deal, any british people here who think that.. um Im sorry man but every EU member state gets a veto and even if you had the best negiotiators the chances that some country like um France wouldn't scuttle a deal purely out of spite are exactly Zero.
The real hillarity would have been if BoJo went to the EU requesting an extension and then used the British veto (the European Council has to be unanimous on Brexit matters) to veto his own request for an extension.
