No such thing as “cannot”. That makes it a rubber stamp. The monarch cannot rubber stamp laws that go against “the laws of God” per the oath, or else the oath is broken. When the law says assent can be withheld, then it can; practice is not precedent, and the law is still clear. Furthermore, as the head of the Anglican Church, the monarch cannot act like Eli towards Hophni and Phinehas without breaking the oath of coronation.
There is a third alternative to either granting or withholding assent, still: that being reserve of assent (deferment).
Claiming that on this issue a withholding of assent on a matter such as this would be a constitutional crisis is accusing the entire UK of being liberal. Remember, this bill was forced through by unscrupulous Tories. I suspect that the Queen, if she had been so bold as to withhold assent, would have had more support among the people than everyone here realizes. The oath of coronation is broken by granting of assent.
“the Queen, if she had been so bold as to
withhold assent, would have had more support among the people than everyone here realizes.”
I’ve spent way too much time in the UK to believe that’s the case.
You still haven’t answered my question.