Current understanding is that this survives. It's not an amendment to a bill, which would go down with the ship. It's House deciding how it does business, particularly in relation to Withdrawal Act and Standing Order 24B. It's political and has done what it is going to do.
Also: given scale of Grieve amendment victory, it's likely House would simply vote for it again even if govt could wipe it out somehow. Most people think battle for meaningful vote on no-deal has been won.
There is one concern though. Legal guarantee of a statement by January 29 on no-deal was on basis of there being "no agreement in principle". But May does have a deal in principle, just not one that can get past Commons. Possible way out for her there.
Anyway that's a battle for another day. Let's see what clusterfuck today wants to offer us first.
Anyway if you want terribly clever constitutional types to follow over the next few days I would recommend:
@ThimontJack
@jasimsoncaird
@RuthFox01
@Brigid_Fowler
@AlexRunswick
@ThimontJack
@jasimsoncaird
@RuthFox01
@Brigid_Fowler
@AlexRunswick
