This thesis is a descriptive analysis of the importance and use of legal argumentation in the Brexit political communication environment. The emphasis of this thesis is placed upon relevant politicians either in the House of Commons of the United Kingdom or European Commission as the main negotiator form the European Union side in the withdrawal process. Legal arguments present a crucial part of the Brexit process, all the way from the referendum up until this point, they are proving to be the most important thing in the political communication in regards to Brexit. Priming and framing theoretical approaches are utilized in order to determine their importance and how politicians differ in their portrayal in order to satisfy their political preferences.

The aim is to successfully provide a description of the use of such arguments by the politicians in their own manner, to understand how party affiliates and political preferences are portraying their meaning, thus revealing their importance. The research uses many analytical and methodological aspects, more precisely, qualitative research analysis, along with content analysis approach since the research will reflect on the text-based data.

The analysis is conducted in accordance to analytical framework, and theoretical guidance of the priming and framing theory. The deduced frames, along with the requisites of the priming theory, represent the basis for the structure of the analysis section. The analysis section also reflects on the two actors of the Brexit phenomenon, so that the research addresses the theoretical aspects, and also respect the fact that the research is conducted in the Brexit environment.

Based on the shown data, the results show that politicians are indeed using legal arguments to present other issues, and the research also reveals which kind of legal arguments are most used. It shows the way in which politicians are utilizing legal argumentation since they are shifting the focus away from the legal argumentation and placing it on other issues. It is also shown which of the legal arguments are most prevalent and most frequent among the analyzed data. The direct way in which the results have been shown are related to the research questions, and there are three of them.

Research questions have been established by the help of the theoretical approaches of priming and framing theories. The first research question relates to the use of legal argumentation and their portrayal in international relations sense, and from the shown data it is established that legal argumentation is used to shift the focus from legal arguments to international relations issues, and furthermore the data showed which legal arguments have been used most frequently. Both of these results are related to the nature of the framing and priming theories, framing in which the salience is placed on particular issues, thus shifted from others, and priming in which it has shown what arguments have been used the most.

The second research question relates to the use of legal argumentation and their portrayal in an economic sense, and from the shown data it is established that legal argumentation is used to shift the focus from legal arguments to economic issues, and furthermore the data showed which legal arguments have been used most frequently.

Both of these results are related to the nature of the framing and priming theories, framing in which the salience is placed on particular issues, thus shifted from others, and priming in which it has shown what arguments have been used the most.

The third research question relates to the use of legal argumentation and their portrayal in human rights sense, and from the shown data it is established that legal argumentation is used to shift the focus from legal arguments to human rights issues, and furthermore the data showed which legal arguments have been used most frequently. Both of these results are related to the nature of the framing and priming theories, framing in which the salience is placed on particular issues, thus shifted from others, and priming in which it has shown what arguments have been used the most.