31 August 2025
Overcoming Objections to Overcome the Hungarian Veto
This June, we proposed ways to overcome a Hungarian veto on EU sanctions against Russia. Our proposal prompted Mark Dawson and Martijn van den Brink to write a sharp response, arguing that we had ventured beyond the confines of serious legal scholarship into the realm of the fantastical. Our critics and we seem to live in different realities. When reading Dawson’s and van den Brink’s piece, it feels like the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine does not exist. Yet, there lies an uncomfortable truth at the heart of our proposal, one that our critics fail to recognize: the Russian war might grow into an existential threat to the European Union. Continue reading >>
3 
13 June 2025
Overcoming the Hungarian Veto
A Russian victory over Ukraine would make a military confrontation with Europe more likely. To prevent this, the Union must prolong the Russian sanctions, including the freezing of 200 billion EUR in central bank assets. The prolongation of these sanctions requires a unanimous decision pursuant to Article 31(1) TEU. Hungary threatens to obstruct this decision. We propose a way to end Hungary's obstruction. It requires no grand actions, only a few interpretative steps and a narrow political consensus. Continue reading >>07 May 2025
It’s solidarity, stupid!
Few cases have triggered as stark reactions as Commission v Malta. In the ruling’s aftermath, many legal scholars and practitioners were quick to discard the decision. While the ruling is bold, innovative, and goes far beyond established precedent, the Court’s reasoning remains brief, ambiguous, in some parts even obscure and sibylline. Yet, most of the Court’s “great” judgments have left room for interpretation. No doubt, Commission v Malta will be subject to many, very different, affirmative or critical interpretations. In the following, I will provide one – of several possible! – readings, which seeks to square the ruling with constitutional reasoning. Continue reading >>
0
10 April 2025
Tackling the Union’s “Orbán Problem” Now
The EU is facing an “Orbán problem”. That much is clear. The Hungarian government not only pursues an illiberal domestic agenda that violates the Union’s values in Article 2 TEU, but also cultivates close ties with autocratic regimes abroad, particularly with Russia. The Hungarian government consistently uses its veto powers to block Ukrainian military aid and dilute sanctions against Russia. The Commission should submit a new proposal under Article 7(2) TEU focusing on breaches of solidarity and threats to the Union’s security. Continue reading >>26 November 2024
European Society Strikes Back
“This is a frontal and deep attack against the … European society.” With this remarkable statement the Commission has started the “largest human rights battle in EU history”: the infringement proceedings against the Hungarian anti-LGBTIQ* law. The Commission claims that this law breaches the internal market, the Charter rights and the Union’s common values enshrined in Article 2 TEU. The “mega hearing”, which took place on 19 November 2024, is now facing its ultimate test: can the Member States’ compliance with Article 2 TEU be reviewed before the Court of Justice? Continue reading >>22 November 2024
Die stille Mehrheit hat ihre Stimme gefunden
Fünf Fragen an John Morijn und Luke Dimitrios Spieker Continue reading >>22 November 2024
The Silent Majority Has Found Its Voice
Five Questions to John Morijn and Luke Dimitrios Spieker Continue reading >>
0
22 October 2024
Kein Mut zur Lücke!
Der jüngst eingebrachte Gesetzentwurf zum besseren Schutz des Bundesverfassungsgerichts stellt einen wichtigen Schritt dar. Allerdings klafft weiterhin eine große Lücke in diesem Schutz. Das Wahlverfahren sowie die 2/3-Mehrheit für die Richterwahl, die Senatsmehrheiten für gerichtliche Entscheidungen und die Gesetzeskraft bestimmter Urteile verbleiben im Bundesverfassungsgerichtsgesetz und damit dem Zugriff einer einfachen Mehrheit im Bundestag ausgesetzt. Auch wenn politische Mehrheiten für eine weiterreichende Grundgesetzänderung nicht aufzubringen sind, besteht gleichwohl ein schonender Weg, um das Bundesverfassungsgerichtsgesetz stärker abzusichern: ein Zustimmungserfordernis durch den Bundesrat bei Änderungen des BVerfGG. Continue reading >>
0
09 October 2024
Dismissing the Genuine Link by Disregarding Constitutional Principles
The struggle over the Maltese investment citizenship scheme is probably one of the fiercest debates of EU constitutional law. The conflict revolves around the question of whether EU law contains requirements for the acquisition of Union citizenship and whether these requirements consist in a “genuine link” between the respective state and individual. The recent Opinion by AG Collins provides us with an extremely narrow and astonishingly one-sided view. In particular, he seeks to make us believe that there are no sound ways to anchor a genuine link requirement in EU law. Martijn van den Brink finds it “hard to disagree with the Advocate General”. Respectfully, I disagree. Continue reading >>26 June 2024
The Lighthouse of EU Law Shines on the Polish Constitutional Tribunal
Last week, legal scholars from all over the world met in Freiburg at the ConTrans conference. On the one end of the spectrum, scholars like Woijcech Sadurski advocated for a revolutionary approach, simply dismantling the current Tribunal and re-building it from scratch. On the other end stands Adam Bodnar, who stressed the importance of legality in the transition process. In my view, EU law shines a possible way ahead – it can justify disregarding the Tribunal’s decisions and empower ordinary courts to assume the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. Eventually, this would lead to a decentralised constitutional review. Continue reading >>
0