<p>Displacement by climate-related factors is on the rise, yet no specific international legal framework obligates states to protect cross-border climate displaced persons. This paper examines the influence of crisis as a narrative force that shapes legal responses to forced migration. Crisis, as a pervasive and influential construct in political, media, and legal discourse, serves both as a driver of urgency and a justification for restrictive and exclusionary policies or inaction. Drawing on the work of Charlesworth and Broude, I will analyse the tension between crisis framing and the development of durable international law. Using a dual-pronged crisis model, the analysis explores how micro-crises (specific displacement events) and macro-crisis narratives (the broader faming of climate change as a crisis) can simultaneously catalyse and obstruct legal evolution. While crisis can spur action, it risks reinforcing restrictive approaches and securitised measures that leave displaced persons unsupported. The treatment of climate displacement in European policy development reveals deep contestation over state obligations, the securitisation of forced migration, and the competing interests that shape legal inertia and restrictive policymaking. I argue that unless the underlying contextual dynamics of crisis are addressed, legal responses to climate displacement will continue to face resistance. To move beyond reactive, containment-based approaches, a more pragmatic and proactive engagement with crisis discourse is necessary, one that anticipates and navigates the discursive power of crises to create legal frameworks that are responsive and resilient in the face of extraordinary challenges and global instability.</p>