I think the real issues are much more deep seated at a fundamental psychological and social level than that.\n\nProfound changes occurred in England from the 12 th century on. Under Henry Plantagenet the Great Council was established. Under his rule the foundations of British Common law were established, for both criminal and civil proceedings. The Jury system dates from about that time. This was the foundation of British common Law, the basis of jurisprudence though out the English speaking world including the US. The continental European justice systems are based on Roman Law. The two do not coexist well. So the EU insistence on the supremacy of the European Court of Justice does not fit well in the UK and is a serious point of conflict.\n\nIn fact under UK law, civil and especially financial cases can be heard in any jurisdiction. In financial cases in particular there is heavy preference for financial cases to be tried in the UK. So actually the UK legal profession probably stand to loose the most in a post Brexit world.\n\nDuring the thirteenth century Parliaments become more organized and by 1295 Parliament met at Westminster and was called the 'Commons" for the first time.\n\nOf course there were stresses and strains, with the Oxford provisions having to wrung out of King John and later Magna Carta.\n\nBy 1668 the supremacy of Parliament was established.\n\nBy contrast the rule on continental Europe was in large degree despotic. So it is no wonder that the UK populace are restive as what they see as a very inferior system of governance and jurisprudence the other side of the channel.\n\nThe EU have been relentingly successful at keeping senior leadership positions out of the hands of anyone from the UK. I suspect they fear the light of more democratic voices.\n\nI think it is fair to say that a lot of the UK populace feel highly disenfranchised by the EU systems of governance. In my view with good reason. This is a major point of conflict not well covered in the US press.\n\nI spoke with my brother a couple or so hours ago. He has been leader of the Kent County Council now for many years. I don't think he will run next time. Anyhow he is a senior conservative politician with easy access to the leavers of power, as the KCC has the largest budget behind the central government in the UK.\n\nHe feels there is now the feeling of major change and that the UK will leave the EU without agreement on October 31 with or without an election. He feels that Boris is now barnstorming the country in full election mode, prepared for one at any time\n\nThe clock may run out, as Parliament will be in recess until September. Under current rules an election would likely be called with the passing of a no confidence motion, or the agreement of two thirds of the house of commons. That being the case it is hard to see election being held before October 31 and so the clock would run out and the UK exit October 31 with no agreement. \n\nAfter that an election would very likely follow, that Boris Johnson would most likely win. In any event it would be years before the UK could rejoin the EU.\n\nAs far as the union is concerned, Wales is pro leave as is most of England, especially the old industrial heart land of the North and Midlands.\n\nScotland is strongly remain. However Boris has said he will not allow another independence referendum. In any case Scotland would have to float a new currency as it would take some time to not only get admitted to the EU but more especially the Euro. A UK government would not share Sterling currency, although they could not stop them using it. However they would have to buy sterling reserves and could not run a deficit.\n\nNorthern Ireland voted remain. However I don't think the locals on either side will go back to a hard border. So the border will be "run" and illegal profits made shipping goods across the border. Anyone who knows the Irish, can foretell exactly what will happen. Any attempt to impose a foreign army will be strongly resisted on both sides.\n\nThe EU will have the choice of tolerating it, or imposing border controls on goods and people entering mainland Europe from and EU country! Interesting times indeed.\n\nAFIAK and as you probably know (because they don't teach this in the US), juries, Parliament and other aspects of government that you're attributing to Henry II were brought to Britain by the Nordic people, earlier than the 10th Century and implemented during Danelaw. The council of locals was called 'thing', with 'Allthing' being more the basis of Parliament. Juries were part of the 'thing' and according to Wiki, Eathelred the Unready had issued an order requiring the use of groups that acted as juries before he died in 1013. The Magna Carta provided legal protections, access to faster trials and formed much of the basis of the law we enjoy now, as well the the US Constitution and as Popes had done before, it was annulled by a Pope (Innocent III)\n\nWRT Parliament being made supreme, England had several wars with itself by that time, too. \n\nNobody said government is simple.