The issue of a "meaningful vote" is set to be a flashpoint in the Commons, with ministers seeking to overturn a Lords amendment which would give Parliament extensive powers to direct ministers how to proceed if a deal with Brussels is rejected by MPs or no deal is reached.
The votes tonight followed a dramatic day of politics in Westminster on Tuesday, when Prime Minister May agreed in principle to give MPs greater power in the Brexit process in order to avoid a humiliating defeat.
He said the United Kingdom should "re-engage with our European and worldwide friends to talk about how to achieve the aims that we share for the future in ways that respect individual countries' interests and sovereignty", taking into account concerns expressed in other EU countries since the Brexit vote about the bloc's direction.
However flabbily drafted the clause may be, defeat for the government would send a strong signal that Parliament doesn't back the negotiating goals May is pursuing.
Since there is certainly no majority among MPs for no deal - which all but a hard core of Brexit ultras believe would be disastrous - that now makes no deal extremely unlikely.
Prior to the votes, the government suffered its first ministerial resignation over Brexit as Phillip Lee quit the Ministry of Justice so he could speak out freely.
Labour opposed the EEA model and introduced its own amendment, tabled by Sir Keir Starmer, which was defeated by 82 votes on Wednesday night.
The Government's compromise is that a minister would come to the House within 28 days of a deal being rejected to tell MPs what will happen next, but an amendment tabled by former attorney general Dominic Grieve would insist on a binding Commons motion. Her spokesman told reporters that the government would have to present it on Thursday.
He later claimed Mr Johnson "inhabited a parallel universe" in which the referendum result is not respected "unless you want friction at the borders and disruption of the economy".
"How much more damage is the Prime Minister going to do to the country before she realises the important thing is to get a deal for the people of this country, not one to appease the clashing giant egos of her Cabinet?" If confirmed, the move represents a dramatic climbdown from Mrs May's original plan to offer MPs a "take it or leave it" vote to accept the withdrawal agreement or leave the European Union without a deal. The Lords' amendment, which MPs rejected, went further in requiring the withdrawal agreement to be placed on a statutory footing.
Brexit minister David Davis had earlier warned lawmakers that the government would never allow them to "reverse Brexit" or undermine negotiations. But it's also worth recalling that the wording of his amendment was later deemed so weak that the Lords had to beef it up. Brexit supporters will be watching closely to see what concessions the government finally offers to the rebels.
The government said before the vote it disagreed with the amendment and the Labour frontbench was expected to either vote the same way or abstain.
MPs said they were offered, in a last-minute concession, real "input" if no deal with the European Union was done by December.
Umunna, MP for Streatham, said: "Curbing Commonwealth immigration then and ending European Union free movement now did and is not going to solve these problems and we know it".