POSTS BY Jasper Siegert
30 July 2026
,

A Right Not to Move

What does Union citizenship, traditionally dependent on a cross-border element, offer to those who have never exercised their right to free movement? For more than a decade, the position of “static Union citizens” has remained confined to the exceptional protection recognised in Zambrano. In its recent judgment in Safi, delivered on 4 June 2026, the ECJ extended those limits. The judgment established that Union citizenship protects static minor Union citizens from being forced to move within the Union. In doing so, the Court implicitly recognised a right not to move. Continue reading >>
0
29 June 2026

A Society of Trust

This contribution investigates a still underexplored element of Commission v Hungary. The judgment undoubtedly matters in terms of the enforceability of Article 2 TEU. Yet its significance reaches further. The Court also recalled that the Union’s common values are linked to one of the central mechanisms of EU law: the principle of mutual trust. I submit that mutual trust should not be understood merely as a technical rule of inter-state recognition but as the horizontal institutional grammar of interdependence within European society. Continue reading >>
0
22 June 2026
,

European Society After Commission v Hungary

Since the CJEU published its monumental decision Commission v Hungary on April 21, scholars have already produced an impressive number of analyses. This symposium on ‘European Society after Commission v Hungary’ aims to add to this debate by focusing on the deeper, structural, and so far overlooked implications of this decision for the concept of European society. In this introductory post, we adopt a genealogical approach to the emergence of the research interest in European society and elaborate on its implications and challenges. Continue reading >>
0
16 April 2026

Queer, aber unpolitisch

Die Landesdirektion Sachsen hat einer Veranstaltung rund um den CSD die Versammlungseigenschaft abgesprochen. Das kann schwere Folgen für die Veranstaltung haben. Dabei macht es sich die Landesdirektion in ihrer Begründung rechtlich zu einfach und entscheidet zu pauschal. Zugleich sendet sie damit ein fatales Signal: Anstatt die queere Community in Dresden und Sachsen zu stärken, erschwert sie es der Zivilgesellschaft, für Vielfalt und Toleranz aktiv einzustehen. Continue reading >>
Go to Top