Wie steht es um die Debatte um Bürgerräte in Deutschland? Dieses Symposium versammelt interdisziplinäre Beiträge zu Form und Ausgestaltung, den Funktionen und der verfassungsrechtlichen Verankerung von Bürgerräten. Es behandelt rechtsvergleichende und gesellschaftliche Perspektiven und macht konkrete Vorschläge zur Institutionalisierung.

As climate change worsens, interest is growing in the link between intellectual property protection and environmental sustainability. At the heart of these discussions are concerns that strong IP protection may hinder sustainable practices. This blog symposium brings together leading experts to explore the connection between the Human Right to a Healthy Environment and IP protection.

The ongoing controversies over methods in EU law reflect a broader rethinking of the discipline, influenced by multiple crises in the European Union. Scholars are questioning traditional conceptions of EU law as a law of integration and its disconnection from European societies. The rise of critical approaches and empirical methods, alongside interdisciplinary perspectives, challenges doctrinal and functionalist interpretations. This shift, often referred to as a methodological turn, does not imply dominance over classical approaches but calls for a “reflexive turn.” Scholars are urged to reflect on their methods and the role of EU law in the production of legal knowledge, fostering greater awareness of historical and contemporary debates in the field.

At a time when calls for the EU to respond to Musk’s actions are multiplying, the question of whether, why, and how the EU may react remains largely undefined. What makes Musk’s conduct problematic under EU law? Is it a matter of disinformation, electoral integrity, foreign influence, unprecedented market concentration, or possible abuse of power? Or is it all of the above, or a combination of these factors? This symposium intends to explore these questions through a series of brief opinion pieces.

In December 2023, the new Polish government set out to repair the country’s rule of law and restore the judiciary’s independence. Twelve months later, this symposium evaluates what progress Poland has made, what issues remain unaddressed, and what the outlook is for the rule of law in a country that’s about to assume the Presidency of the Council of the EU.

On paper, the fundamental rights found in the EU Charter have undergone a remarkable journey, evolving from soft general principles of law into a transformative force shaping EU law. And while legal experts are well-aware of the foundational role the Charter plays within the EU, it has failed to become a document that European citizens have embraced as their own. This symposium, edited by Jakob Gašperin Wischhoff, is the first of several that aim to change this. Featuring legal scholars and practitioners examining the most pressing questions surrounding the Charter, we will show both its transformative force as well as areas where its potential is yet to be fully realized.

Wenn diesen Sonntag Landtagswahlen in Thüringen und in Sachsen stattfinden, könnte eine autoritär-populistische Partei stärkste Kraft werden, die mit ihrem Volksbegriff gegen Menschenwürde und Demokratieprinzip verstößt und die rechtliche Gleichheit der Staatsangehörigen in Frage stellt. Welche Szenarien der Diskriminierung könnten auf uns zukommen, wenn die AfD in Regierungsverantwortung versuchen würde, diese politischen Bestrebungen umzusetzen? Diese Frage stellt das Online-Symposium „Wen es trifft“ des Thüringen-Projekts.

Constitutions are shaped by historical narratives and collective memories. Historical traumas affect national and international laws and policies. The fears, anxieties, and aspirations of subsequent generations of both perpetrator and victim groups play a role in forming social and political perceptions of what a just and fair order requires. This blog symposium focuses on the constitutional and legal commitments, orientations, and arguments that the trauma of WWII and the Holocaust have given rise to and how they have changed over time.

Co-edited by Mattias Kumm and Liav Orgad

There is much to unpack in the now final text of the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. In partnership with the German Institute for Human Rights, this blog symposium discusses the Directive’s scope on human and environmental rights, its extraterritorial reach, the role of National Human Rights Institutions, accompanying measures for corporations, and delves into critical issues such as access to justice for rightsholders, administrative oversight, and the underlying neo-colonial context of the law-making process.

On May 21, 2024, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) delivered a long-awaited Advisory Opinion on climate change and international law. This joint blog symposium with the Sabin Center’s Climate Law Blog delves into specific aspects of the ITLOS opinion and situates it in the wider context of climate and environmental litigation.

In a transformative moment for European and global climate litigation, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled for the first time in its history that inadequate climate mitigation measures violate human rights. The implications are far-reaching, both in Europe and beyond. This joint blog debate with the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law assesses the Court’s climate judgments from April 9 and discusses the implications for climate protection and climate litigation.

Die bundesweiten Demonstrationen in Reaktion auf das Potsdamer “Remigrationstreffen” haben die Debatte über ein Verbot der AfD neu entfacht. Welchen rechtlichen und politischen Hürden begegnet ein solcher Schritt, auch in Anbetracht wirksamer Selbstviktimisierungsstrategien der AfD? Wie gehen andere Länder mit vergleichbaren Bedrohungen für die Demokratie um? In einem Blog-Symposium des Instituts für Deutsches und Internationales Parteienrecht und Parteienforschung (PRUF) und der Stiftung Wissenschaft und Demokratie (SW&D) in Kooperation mit dem Thüringen-Projekt versammeln wir Beiträge, die das Parteiverbot grundlegend und aus unterschiedlichen Perspektiven analysieren.

The COVID-19 pandemic laid bare the cracks in the global health system, exposing stark inequalities in access to life-saving vaccines. While the wealthier nations hoarded doses, millions in the Global South remained unprotected. What could a fair and decolonized global health system look like? This blog debate brings scholars from various disciplines together to assess current reform processes of the world health system and the role that law plays in it.

Methodological issues pervade contemporary debates in EU law. The multiple crises that the European Union is experiencing are leading EU law scholars to question their classical conception of EU law – a law of integration – and their relationship to the European institutions. The blog posts collected in this symposium provide an overview of these ongoing methodological controversies. The current state of EU law can be seen as an exemplary site for reflection on legal methodology and, more generally, on the restructuring moments of a disciplinary field. This opens new perspectives for the challenges EU law – and its scholarship – face in the 21st century, from fundamental rights to external pressures.

2023 has seen an uptick in migratory flows and a concomitant escalation of restrictionist governmental approaches to migration control. Newly introduced measures increasingly violate even long-established human rights norms and/or the rule of law, while also failing to provide real solutions to the challenges that (im)migration governance poses. Language of crisis, necessity, emergency and deterrence have been pervasive, combined with an increasingly nativist and exclusionary nationalist discourse within even established liberal democracies. Legal commentary has mostly remained reactive, leaving little space for discussion of what an alternative legal and political approach to migration governance might look like. In this symposium, scholars of migration law take stock of the current framework, its policies and normative assumptions and discuss where to go from here.

The project “Outstanding Women of International, European and Constitutional Law“ is an initiative of students and young scholars of the Faculty of Law at the University of Hamburg, inspired by an eponymous seminar held by Verena Kahl (Ass. iur., M.A.) and Prof. Dr. Markus Kotzur, LL.M. (Duke Univ.) in 2021. The aim of the project is to make distinguished women and their important contributions to the development of the national and international legal order visible and better known.

Since 2022, a pocket calendar consisting of twelve short portraits of outstanding women in the fields of International, European and Constitutional Law has been published annually to showcase women and their achievements as well as challenges they encountered throughout the course of their careers. Each calendar aims to feature women of different times and various backgrounds, following an intersectional approach.

In 2024, the project started a collaboration with the Verfassungsblog to publish detailed monthly portraits of the women presented in the calendar. For more information, please visit the project’s UHH website or follow us on social media (@outstanding_women_jura_uhh on Instagram and @OW_Jura_UHH on X).

The Russian Constitution has just turned 30 years old. But do law, constitution, and courts still play a role in a deeply authoritarian and aggressive regime? What has gone wrong in the history of Russian constitutionalism? These questions are not only of domestic relevance: For Soviet dissident and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Andrei Sakharov, peace went hand in hand with human rights and progress. This blog debate, in collaboration with the German Sakharov Society, is seeking answers and sheds light on the legal tools of Russian authoritarianism.

Das Thüringen-Projekt fragt: Was wäre, wenn? Das wahrscheinlichste Szenario autoritär-populistischer Machtausübung in Thüringen und generell in Deutschland ist nicht eine Regierungsbeteiligung. Wenn eine Fraktion über ein Drittel der Landtagsmandate erhält, kann sie aus der Position der Minderheit heraus die Arbeitsfähigkeit von Parlament und Regierung effektiv stören. Auch unterhalb einer solchen Sperrminorität ist parlamentarische Obstruktion möglich. Aber wozu sind parlamentarische Minderheitenrechte da, wenn nicht dazu, der Mehrheit im Weg zu sein?

Mit dem Grundgesetz unvereinbar und nichtig: Das Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichts zum Zweiten Nachtragshaushaltsgesetz 2021 hat nicht nur den Staatshaushalt, sondern auch die Regierung in eine Krise gestürzt. Die aufgeworfenen Fragen sind groß. Es geht um Notsituationen und wie man sie bewältigt, um parlamentarische Gestaltungsräume und deren Einengung – und nicht zuletzt auch darum, ob die Schuldenbremse in Zeiten multipler Krisen noch eine zeitgemäße Regelung des Grundgesetzes ist.

Deutschland hat sich mit Erlass des Prostitutionsgesetzes für eine Legalisierung der Sexarbeit entschieden. Im Jahr 2017 trat das Prostituiertenschutzgesetz in Kraft, das eine differenzierte gewerberechtliche Herangehensweise zur Regulierung der Sexarbeit mit verschiedenen Anmelde-, Genehmigungs- und Hinwirkenspflichten verfolgt. Reguliert wird die Sexarbeit in Deutschland zudem durch zahlreiche weitere gesetzliche Regelungen wie beispielsweise das Strafrecht, das Baurecht oder das Arbeitsrecht. Das Symposium „Regulierung der Sexarbeit in Deutschland – 6 Jahre Prostituiertenschutzgesetz“ beleuchtet aus einer intradisziplinären Perspektive verschiedene Aspekte der rechtlichen Regulierung der Sexarbeit und zieht damit gleichzeitig eine Zwischenbilanz zum Prostituiertenschutzgesetz.

Wie ist es verfassungsrechtlich und politikwissenschaftlich zu analysieren und zu bewerten, wenn das Parlament “in eigener Sache” entscheidet? Welche Bedeutung haben solche Konstellationen für die Stabilität und Funktionsfähigkeit der Demokratie? Welche Mechanismen können den Konflikt entschärfen? Können aus der Verfassung bestimmte prozedurale Pflichten oder aber die Notwendigkeit der Einschaltung unabhängiger Akteure abgeleitet werden? Diesen Fragen will sich ein Blogsymposium des Instituts für Deutsches und Internationales Parteienrecht und Parteienforschung (PRUF) und der Stiftung Wissenschaft und Demokratie (SW&D) aus rechts- wie politikwissenschaftlicher Sicht widmen.

Digital labour platforms like Glovo, Uber, or Helpling try to disrupt labour laws all over the world. Since the EU Commission put forward a proposal for a Directive on improving working conditions in platform work in December 2021, all eyes are on the EU. The trilogue negotiations starting over the summer will hopefully end up making true some of the promises of protection and transnational harmonisation. This symposium explains what is at stake for platform workers, which digital platforms could be covered and what the proposed presumption of employment would bring. Further, the symposium looks into ways of effectively addressing platforms as undertakings in EU labour law in the future, at issues of social security for platform workers, as well as at the future of data protection in the context of algorithmic management.

Klimawandel, Artensterben und Umweltverschmutzung von globalem Ausmaß bedrohen die Existenz von uns Menschen und unserer Mitwelt. Eine zügige Transformation zu einer nachhaltigen Gesellschaft ist das Gebot der Stunde. Welche Beiträge kann das Recht in diesem Transformationsprozess leisten? Begleitend zur 2. Jahrestagung des Forums Junges Nachhaltigkeitsrecht bringt diese Debatte ausgewählte Diskurs- und Lösungsansätze aus dem Forum zusammen.

The social media landscape is changing. The ‘public forum’ is now filled with citizens selling products, promoting services, charging for subscriptions, and sometimes seeking attention in ways which may not be socially desirable. We ask: How can a space that is becoming increasingly commercialised, monetised, and is a source of income for many nevertheless be fair? Departing from this foundational question, this symposium pursues many more granular ones, each anchored in whether and how the rights of users in social media spaces can be strengthened vis-à-vis dominant platforms via social media contracts.

2023 marks the 50th anniversary of Ireland and the UK’s accession to the now European Union, and three years since the UK withdrew from it. This symposium reflects on the constitutional evolution brought about by EU membership and Brexit. Following nearly fifty years of convergence and integration, commentators interrogate the meaning and nature of EU membership in a current and former member state, reflecting on common questions including sovereignty, constitutional identity, and the protection of rights.

Abortion rights are being claimed, challenged, and contested around the world – not only after Dobbs. Between defendants of reproductive autonomy and advocates of a fetal right to life, consensus may seem hard to find. The German debate was stuck since the Federal Constitutional Court obliged Parliament to criminalise abortion in 1993 but is gaining new momentum. This blog debate aims to enrich the national debate with a comparative perspective, assembling legal experts from different constitutional traditions and legal systems to explore what regulation may look like.

Russia’s unlawful invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 did not only alter the security paradigm in Europe. It also upended the legal landscape of the European Union and Ukraine, leading to the latter becoming a candidate for EU membership and influencing the ongoing rule of law crisis in Hungary and Poland. This debate focuses on various new legal challenges for the EU, its Member States and Ukraine that arose as a consequence of the Russian invasion. In order to present our debate to the most relevant audience, this symposium is published in both English and Ukrainian.

Nach dem Wahldesaster in der Bundeshauptstadt Berlin am 26. September 2021 gerät das Verfahren in den Fokus, in dem der korrekte Ablauf von Wahlen überprüft und sicher gestellt werden soll. Ist das aktuelle Wahlprüfungsverfahren dieser Erwartung gewachsen? In einem Blog-Symposium in Kooperation mit dem Institut für Deutsches und Internationales Parteienrecht und Parteienforschung (PRUF) an der Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf und der Stiftung Wissenschaft und Demokratie wollen wir aus rechts- wie politikwissenschaftlicher Sicht ausloten, welche Bedeutung der Wahlprüfung für die Infrastruktur der Demokratie zukommt, welche Bedrohungen in der aktuellen Situation von konkreten Ausgestaltungen ausgehen können und welche Optionen bestünden, es zu reformieren.

The Digital Services Act was finally published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 27 October 2022. This publication marks the end of a years-long drafting and negotiation process, and opens a new chapter: that of its enforcement, practicable access to justice, and potential to set global precedents. The Act has been portrayed as Europe’s new ‘Digital Constitution’, which affirms the primacy of democratic rulemaking over the private transnational ordering mechanisms of Big Tech. With it, the European Union aims once again to set a global standard in the regulation of the digital environment. But will the the Digital Services Act be able to live up to its expectations, and under what conditions?

Domestic and regional human rights courts around the world are under pressure. Populist, illiberal, or autocratic forms of governance have led to a global attack on constitutional democracy, and its guardians, courts. As a result, courts find themselves in a dilemma: should they intervene much more fiercely to uphold the rule of law or protect their institutional powers, but risk to be further attacked as enemies of the government and the majorities? Or should they practice judicial and prudential restraint to safeguard their institutional autonomy in the long term, but risk to be failing and regarded as foes by minority groups, civil society, and progressive movements who are on the receiving end of populist, illiberal or autocratic practices?

The Russian army commits horrible war crimes in Ukraine. Should EU member states allow Russian tourists to come and spend their summer holidays in the EU as if nothing happened? Some authors have criticized a blanket visa ban for Russians from a political, but also legal perspective: Schengen rules do not allow it, in their opinion. This has stirred a passionate debate on Verfassungsblog which we document in this blog symposium.

Ukraine is under armed attack. What is under attack is not just Ukraine’s sovereignty
and territorial integrity, but also its political independence. To defend Ukraine is to defend constitutional democracy and the rule of law. This blog debate focusses on a central actor in Ukrainian constitutionalism: the Verkhovna Rada, Ukraine’s Parliament. Examining the role of the Verkhovna Rada in armed conflict through a comparative lens, this debate, organised in collaboration with Stiftung Wissenschaft & Demokratie and the Institute for German and International Party and Parliamentary Law (PRUF), provides ideas for the Ukrainian context, and explores the issue more generally.

Als Reaktion auf die Anschläge vom 11. September 2001 haben nur wenige politische Reaktionen so viel Aufmerksamkeit erregt wie die internationale Ausweitung staatlicher Überwachung und die damit einhergehende massive Verletzung des Rechts auf Privatsphäre. In diesem Symposium befassen wir uns mit der Normalisierung der Überwachung seit 9/11 und den Eingriffen in die Privatsphäre.

Algorithms have become an undeniable fixture, invisibly pervading our daily lives and mediating processes which affect the fabric of the rule of law. In this symposium, we have invited experts to ask questions about the fundamental compatibility between algorithms and elements of the rule of law, and to make suggestions on how to make the best of the seemingly inevitable rise of AI.

This blog debate reflects on the transnational private regulation of speech by Sport Governing Bodies (SGBs), and more specifically members of the Olympic Movement. SGBs raise concerns similar to those discussed in the context of social media companies: When should SGBs intervene to restrict freedom of expression during international competitions? When are private restrictions of freedom of expression legal? And who is competent to decide whether they are?

Human rights and decolonization have a complicated relationship. Focussing on the Dutch colonial past, this blog symposium engages with the ongoing legacies of colonialism and examine human rights both as a language of critique and as a constitutive part of the imperial legacy.

The attacks of 9/11 were not only a media event themselves, but also shifted the guardrails of public and media discourse. These shifts are manifold and have left their mark on the freedoms of the press, of information, and of expression. But can the story of the freedoms of the press, of information and of expression really only be told as a downward spiral?

39 Beauftragte zählte die Bundesregierung zuletzt. Deren Bezeichnungen sind so divers wie ihre Aufgabenzuschnitte. Dabei ist ihr verfassungsrechtliches Rahmenwerk weitgehend unbestimmt. Beauftragte agieren im Auftrag der Bundesregierung, sie regieren aber nicht – welche Funktionen übernehmen sie, welchen Einfluss üben sie aus? Wie verlaufen ihre verfassungsrechtlichen Grenzen? Wo besteht Reformbedarf? Ein Blog-Symposium des Verfassungsblogs und des Exzellenzclusters SCRIPTS.

How to deal with a constitution which has been turned into a tool to perpetuate the governing party’s power even in the case of a lost election? How to dispose of these undemocratic constraints without violating the rule of law oneself? A situation like this might arise in Hungary in Spring 2022 if the unified opposition manages to win a majority over Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party. Two towering figures of constitutional scholarship, Andrew Arato and András Sajó, have addressed questions to the global constitutionalist community on how to deal with this dilemma. We publish a collection of answers in collaboration with THE NEW INSTITUTE in Hamburg.

Wie weit reicht der Grundrechtsschutz in der Pandemie? In zwei grundlegenden Beschlüssen hat das Bundesverfassungsgericht Stellung zu den COVID-Maßnahmen der Bundesregierung bezogen.

“Open Access” suggests the absence of barriers and gatekeepers – but this is evidently not the case. Who gets to publish what and where is still very much a decision made by certain people in certain institutions following certain procedures. In this symposium, we want to learn more about Open Access, the world of academic publishing and the practices of gatekeeping in legal academia.

Die Verknüpfung von Migration und Terrorismus ist heute ein ebenso präsenter wie fragwürdiger Topos öffentlicher Debatten. Nach dem 11. September 2001 nahm diese Verknüpfung erheblich zu, die Themen Migration, Asyl und Staatsbürgerschaft wurden zunehmend auf die innere und äußere Sicherheit bezogen. Die Folgen dieser Diskursverschiebung sind ernst: steigende Ressentiments und sinkende rechtliche Gewährleistungen gegenüber Schutzsuchenden sind auch außerhalb des Globalen Nordens wachsende Phänomene. Lässt sich die Geschichte der globalen Migrationssteuerung tatsächlich nur als Abwärtsspirale erzählen?

Der 11. September 2001 war Ausgangspunkt eines internationalen „Kriegs gegen den Terrorismus“, der grundlegende Fragen für die Normenordnung des Völkerrechts aufwarf. Fast genau 20 Jahre später endet die militärische Präsenz in Afghanistan auf denkbar desillusionierende Weise. Doch unterliegt ein Staat komplementär zu den rechtlichen Voraussetzungen für den Beginn einer Intervention auch Pflichten, wenn er eine Intervention abbricht oder beendet?

The concentration of private power in the digital realm is not tenable – on this there is consensus. It extends across domains of private power, ranging from power over markets and consumers’ behaviour, power over private rule-making to power of and over opinion. The European Union’s Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act set out to bridle these dimensions of power, but are they up to the task? In this Online-Symposium, co-hosted with the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, authors from various legal disciplines enquire into this pressing regulatory concern.

Die Pandemie hat Deutschland vielerorts ins Home Office gezwungen, darunter auch Forscher*innen, Lehrende und Studierende. Mit unserem Symposium „Zugang im Lockdown“ wollen wir wissen: Wie verändert die Pandemie die deutsche Rechtswissenschaft? Was tut sich beim wissenschaftlichen Publizieren, in der Lehre und im akademischen Alltag, wenn Universitäten und Bibliotheken geschlossen bleiben? Rechtswissenschaftler:innen berichten dazu von ihren vielfältigen Erfahrungen während der letzten eineinhalb Jahre. Das Symposium ist Teil unseres BMBF-geförderten Projekts „Offener Zugang zu Öffentlichem Recht“ (OZOR).

Effektiver Klimaschutz ist eine Pflicht, die das Grundgesetz dem Gesetzgeber auferlegt. Mit seinem epochalen Beschluss vom 23. März 2021 hat das Bundesverfassungsgericht eine lebhafte Debatte nicht nur über die Klimapolitik der Bundesregierung, sondern auch über Struktur und Dogmatik des Grundrechteschutzes ausgelöst.

Das Verhältnis zwischen Politik und (Rechts-)Wissenschaft ist in jüngster Zeit von wachsenden Irritationen gekennzeichnet: Auf beiden Seiten wächst die Ungeduld damit, wie mit rechtswissenschaftlichen Diagnosen von Verfassungswidrigkeit umgegangen wird. Die Pandemie hat diese Irritation verschärft. Gibt es für Verfassungsrechts-Expert_innen ein Gebot der Zurückhaltung im politischen Diskurs, und wenn ja, nach welchen Kriterien? Diese Frage stellen wir in einem gemeinsam mit Michaela Hailbronner und Alexander Thiele organisierten und von der Stiftung Wissenschaft & Demokratie unterstützten Online-Symposium zur Debatte.

Events at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law
in Heidelberg, streamed live on Verfassungsblog

One year on how has the COVID-19 pandemic affected the law, and the way states govern? Should we be concerned about the ongoing use of emergency powers? How can we look forward to what lies ahead? This Symposium brings together experts from over 60 countries to reflect on how legal and political systems have adapted to ongoing challenges presented by the pandemic to democracy, human rights, and the rule of law, and to offer recommendations on the future of good governance. Convened by Joelle Grogan, the Symposium is hosted by the Verfassungsblog and supported by Democracy Reporting International and the Horizon-2020 RECONNECT project.

Multiplicity, it is now widely agreed, is a condition of the legal order beyond the state. As a matter of fact, multiple legal orders might overlap, intersect and enmesh; yet how exactly these different legalities interact and what kind of law emerges from this interaction is still far from understood. In our online conference, we explore how we can move beyond a simple, unitary frame to capture the relations of different legalities in the global order, bringing together scholars working in both public and private international law and transnational law, jurisprudence and legal philosophy, history and sociology of law. The conference has been facilitated by DFG and SNF.

Lucia Rubinelli’s book Constituent Power. A History (Cambridge 2020) is a major contribution to democratic thought, in both method and substance. This Verfassungsblog symposium in the context of the Hamburg DFG-funded project „Reclaiming Constituent Power“ (319145390) arises from a shared interest in the subject matter of the book, the democratic reading of the fundamental lawmaking power of the people, as well as from a shared interest in the authors identified as relevant. The comments are devoted to the successive chapters of the book, on Emmanuel Sieyès (Peter Niesen on chap. 1), on French droit publique and Carl Schmitt (Carlos Perez on chap. 2-3), on the post-WW II lawyers such as Mortati and Böckenförde (Markus Patberg on chap. 4), and on Hannah Arendt (Esther Lea Neuhann on chap. 5).

Beamte des Bayerischen Landeskriminalamts durchsuchten am 31.1.2020 das Büro des Hochschullehrers Mark Stemmler, der im Rahmen eines Forschungsprojekts vertrauliche Gespräche mit inhaftierten Jihadis geführt hatte. Interviewaufzeichnungen und weitere identifizierende Informationen wurden trotz seines Protests beschlagnahmt. Der Fall illustriert beispielhaft, dass Forschende derzeit über keine rechtlichen Möglichkeiten verfügen, wissenschaftliche Daten wirksam vor behördlichen Zugriffen zu schützen. Die Interviewpartner*innen selbst, das ethische Selbstverständnis der Wissenschaftler*innen und die Datenschutzregeln von Forschungsförderungsinstitutionen (er)fordern aber systematische und verbindliche Schutzzusagen, um gesellschaftlich wichtiges Wissen gewinnen zu können. Interdisziplinäre Beiträge aus den Rechts- und Sozialwissenschaften debattieren Gründe und Hürden für ein Zeugnisverweigerungsrecht für Wissenschaftler*innen und formulieren juristische Lösungsansätze.

Time and again, the German discourse on European legal matters has facilitated the charge that it attempts to create a German-dominated space, even after World War II. Armin von Bogdandy and Verfassungsblog have asked a number of eminent scholars and practitioners of constitutional and EU law in Europe and beyond to share their thoughts on whether or not German legal hegemony is, in fact, a matter of concern in contemporary EU law, and, if so, what could and should be done about it.

The contributions in this symposium aim to examine the legal and policy implications of the increased informalisation of the EU’s external action in the field of migration and asylum. This trend poses significant constitutional challenges for the EU legal order, individuals it affects, and the global regime for refugee protection.

Are parity laws requiring political parties to alternate between men and women on party lists compatible with democracy? The constitutional court of the German state of Thuringia did not think so, in a decision taken yesterday by 6 men against three dissenting votes, among them the only two female justices on the bench. In most of Europe and many other parts of the world, however, legislated gender quotas are increasingly common. What shall we make of this?

Wenn aktuell über Lieferketten gesprochen wird, geht es vor allem darum, wie ihre Funktionsweise trotz Corona-Krise aufrechterhalten werden kann. Über die Auswirkungen der Krise am Anfang der Lieferketten wird kaum gesprochen. Dort arbeiten Menschen unter Bedingungen, die keine soziale Distanz zum Schutz der eigenen Gesundheit erlauben. Weil europäische Firmen massenhaft Aufträge stornieren, werden Arbeiter*innen auf die Straße gesetzt, ohne dagegen sozial abgesichert zu sein. Das Lieferkettengesetz, um das es in diesem Symposium geht, ist ein Baustein für eine fairere Globalisierung. Die Beiträge beschäftigen sich damit, welche rechtlichen Aspekte berücksichtigt werden müssen, damit das Gesetz wirkt.

As states of emergency are declared throughout the world in response to the spread of COVID-19, concerns arise as to the use – and potential abuse – of power in a time of crisis. In this Symposium, comparative country reports show the use of emergency powers from the perspective of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. Coordinated by Joelle Grogan, this Symposium is hosted by Verfassungblog and Democracy Reporting International under the re:constitution program supported by Stiftung Mercator.

In reaction to the exponentially growing numbers of COVID-19 infections worldwide, events are cancelled, bars, restaurants and borders closed and even whole cities or regions quarantined. In this online symposium, at the request of the state government of Berlin, Verfassungsblog presents comparative country reports outlining the legal basis and the scope of the protective measures taken against the spread of the virus. A particular focus is put on supportive mechanisms for businesses and employees who are directly affected by those measures.

Ist das Volk das Problem oder die Lösung der Demokratie? Wir sind von der Faszination des Volksbegriffs gefangen, ohne zu wissen, was das eigentlich sein soll – ein Volk. Wie ist mit der Frage umzugehen, dass sich Menschen auf das Volk berufen, aber die interne Pluralität des Volks aus dem Blick verlieren und den Wert von Institutionen sowie den Verfahren pluraler Willensbildung geringschätzen? Beiträge aus einem Symposium zu Ehren des 80. Geburtstages von Ulrich K. Preuß am 6.12.2019 an der Hertie School of Governance.

A majority of the world population lives in cities, but determining citizenship remains a monopoly of nation-states. Should cities claim their own citizenship, based on residence rather than nationality? Should they get enhanced powers and bypass states when addressing challenges of migration or climate change? Or would urban citizenship deepen the political divide between metropolitan and rural populations that disintegrates liberal democracies today? GLOBALCIT (EUI) and Verfassungsblog discuss Urban Citizenship in this new Online Symposium.

The year 1989 entered history books as the year of the peaceful dismantling of Soviet-type regimes in East-Central Europe. These regimes did not collapse because of classical revolutions; the process ultimately involved round table negotiations between delegates of the undemocratic powerholders and the democratic opposition. Today the people in the Visegrád countries are divided in their opinions regarding the round tables, not least because of the widespread questioning of its achievements.

With the von der Leyen Commission incoming and set on strengthening the rule of law in the EU, concerns arise as to how to solves the rule of law crisis. From fundamental questions on values to details on particular actions such as the Rule of Law Framework, Democracy Reporting International and Verfassungsblog explore in this Online Symposium the challenge to safeguard the rule of law in the EU in hard times.

Gunther Teubner hat kürzlich die provokante und weitreichende These aufgestellt, dass auch autonome Softwareagenten zur Rechtssubjektivität fähig sind. Diese These stellen wir gemeinsam mit Christian Boulanger (HU/ Recht im Kontext) in den Mittelpunkt eines Online-Symposiums.

The invocation and application of international law in the politically charged context of the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) is a highly contested matter. Orna Ben-Naftali’s, Michael Sfard’s and Hedi Viterbo’s prize-winning book The ABC of the OPT challenges and redefines the language, knowledge, and practices surrounding the Israeli control regime. A group of distinguished experts shall discuss their findings and main claims, and engage in a robust debate on the construction of law and legality.

Does China’s Social Credit System lead the way to a dystopian future? In this online symposium organised by Liav Orgad (EUI/WZB/IDC) and Wessel Reijers (EUI/WZB), we have asked a number of eminent scholars to take sides in this timely controversy concerning an unparalleled effort of social engineering that will soon influence the lives of over a billion citizens.

After many years of political debates on the rule of law in the European Union, mark 24 June 2019 as a key date. On that day the European Court of Justice will judge on the retirement of Poland’s Supreme Court judges. The Union’s highest Court will provide its weight and ultimate legal authority on one of the high-profile cases where a member state government is accused by many to undermine the third branch of power. Democracy Reporting International and Verfassungsblog are hosting this online symposium on the upcoming decision discussing the range of options the Court has in deciding on this matter, including its own position with regard to national judiciaries and the competence order of the EU.

Since 2016, the EU has reinvigorated the Common Security and Defence Policy by introducing an ambitious package of measures aiming at the EU becoming strategically autonomous – most importantly, the Permanent Structured Cooperation. This symposium edited by Jelena von Achenbach examines the resultant state of EU integration, as well as its future prospects. It also takes up ensuing questions of sovereignty, democratic legitimacy, the rule of law, and civil-military relations.

How should the EU deal with politically sensitive takeover bids from third-country state-run companies, most of all from China? In March, this and other questions will be discussed at an international conference, organized by SDU and the University of Gothenburg. In the run-up to this event, we open the debate with an online symposium.

Should EU citizenship be disentangled from member state nationality? Certainly, says Dora Kostakopoulou. By no means, argues Richard Bellamy. In an online symposium in cooperation with Liav Orgad (WZB/EUI) we have asked a number of eminent scholars to take sides in this timely and important controversy.

What lessons does the plight of the Polish and the Hungarian democracy hold for a seemingly stable constitutional state like Germany? How resilient would the German constitutional setup turn out to be in the case of an authoritarian majority taking and successfully holding on to power? What kind of legal or institutional changes may be helpful to make that event less likely and/or less hard to prevent? These are the questions we aim to address in a joint debate by Verfassungsblog and WZB, generously supported by Stiftung Mercator.

The enactment of Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People triggered an intense public debate in Israel. Is the Law indeed racist and discriminatory, as its opponents claim, or is it a valid entrenchment of the right of the Jewish people to self-determination, as claimed by its proponents? Is it primarily declaratory, or does it have real-life implications? The round-table discussion focuses on three areas of possible implications: the law’s impact on equality, self-determination, and social solidarity.

The idea of a political European Commission may be the defining idea of the Juncker Presidency. Did the current Commission achieve its own targets? Was the „political mandate“ a success? Has it improved or further degraded the accountability of the Commission? What price did the Commission have to pay in terms of its role as guardian of the treaties? A joint online symposium by Verfassungsblog and the Hertie School of Government Leviathan Project.

Do EU member states have to trust in courts from other member states who may have compromised the independence of their judiciary? In the ‘Celmer’ judgment, the ECJ has tried to give a balanced answer. In a joint online symposium, MPIL and Verfassungsblog discuss the faults and merits of that seminal decision.

In the context of counter-terrorism, what is the role and responsibility of courts, and constitutional courts in particular? In many respects, courts are the last line of defence in upholding the rule of law during times when it really matters, when society is put to the test. The Asser Institute’s symposium ‘Courts and Counter-Terrorism’ analyses important judgments and legislative developments in several countries, namely the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Finland, Italy, Turkey, China, France, Germany and Spain.

Does the EU have the power to defend the rule of law in Poland? The European Commission has triggered the Article 7(1) TEU procedure against Poland on the grounds that there is now a clear risk of a serious breach of the rule of law. Laurent Pech and Kim Lane Scheppele defend the intervention against its critics in a Q&A in 10 parts.

How we remember the past is subject to legal regulation in many parts of Europe. We prohibit genocide denial and the glorification of totalitarianism, make historical claims in the preambles of constitutions, prescribe how to teach history in school curricula, and more. How is this done, and which problems with fundamental rights and minority protection arise? A joint symposium of the T.M.C. Asser Institute (The Hague) and Verfassungsblog explores these questions and their constitutional answers.​

Der Beschluss des Ersten Senats des Bundesverfassungsgerichts vom 8.11.2017 hat das Potential, die rechtliche Geschlechterordnung vollständig neu zu ordnen. Außerordentlich progressiv und extrem liberal stellt diese Entscheidung den Ausgangspunkt einer völlig neuen Debatte über die rechtliche Regulierung von Geschlecht dar. Das Symposium trägt dieser grundlegenden Bedeutung des Beschlusses Rechnung, indem es aus verschiedenen Perspektiven dessen Implikationen herausarbeitet.

Vor zehn Jahren hatte das BVerfG darüber zu befinden, wie nah ein Roman der Wirklichkeit kommen darf: Je mehr sich “Abbild” und “Urbild” ähneln, so das Gericht damals, desto schwerer wiegt der Eingriff in das Persönlichkeitsrecht gegenüber der Kunstfreiheit. Wie gut hat diese Entscheidung die Zeiten überdauert? Ein Gespräch zwischen Literatur und Rechtswissenschaft.

To which extent is a court justified to bend the rules to resist an attack by other state institutions? At a symposium at Oxford on May 9th, 2017, four eminent legal scholars from Poland talked about the constitutional crisis, its roots and reverberations.

The festering conflict between Germany and Italy about Nazi crime reparations remains unresolved. State immunity clashes with the right to remedy, international rule of law with individual human rights. This debate seeks to address this conflict for the first time from a bi-national perspective, aspiring to suggest concrete solutions to the parties and to engage in “academic diplomacy“ in the service of interstate pacification against a common European horizon.

How to react to the rise of populism seems to be the question of the moment – and it is not a question public lawyers or judges can comfortably ignore. Yet, too often our understanding remains mired in particular domestic perspectives and our only reference point is National Socialism. Unsurprisingly then, the public expectation is generally that lawyers and judges must stand in fiercely for human rights and democracy and that’s it. Yet, what does that mean exactly and are things really that simple? These are some the questions our symposium on Courts and Populism seeks to address, drawing on comparative examples from a wide range of countries and a range of disciplinary perspectives.

The specter of Grexit is again haunting Europe. After more than seven years, countless reform efforts, and a deep social crisis, Greece continues to be at the top of the European agenda. Most remedies have so far focused on economic reforms and the sustainability of Greek debt. Yet the problem of Greece is also its weak institutions. ARMIN VON BOGDANDY and MICHAEL IOANNIDIS put a new proposal up for debate – to use EU help to bring to Greek institutions highly qualified personnel that is not committed to the old systems of power but to the cause of reforming the Greek state.

After the financial crisis has shaken the European project so profoundly, after the turn of Hungary and Poland towards authoritarianism, after the Brexit referendum, after the Trump election, in the midst of the refugee crisis and the rise of populism, the European constellation has become more unstable, the future of the Union more uncertain than ever. The book “The End of the Eurocrats’ Dream”, edited by Christian Joerges, Damian Chalmers and Marcus Jachtenfuchs, collects the analysis of economists, lawyers, philosophers and political scientists of the deeper dimensions of the European crisis with a view towards contributing to a better understanding and shaping the trajectory of the EU. The debate is continued on Verfassungsblog with contributions by RICHARD BELLAMY, BOJAN BUGARIC, MARK DAWSON and FLORIS DE WITTE, MAURIZIO FERRERA, DANIEL INNERARITY, POUL KJAER, KARL-HEINZ LADEUR, ELISE MUIR, JIRI PRIBAN, and JONATHAN WHITE.

From June 17th – 19th, Berlin will abound with constitutionalists from all over the world. The ICON*S conference, now in its third year and already established as one of the focus points of academic constitutionalist debate, is hosted by Humboldt University this year. We document the plenary sessions and a select number of topical paper presentations on Verfassungsblog.

Liechtenstein, Switzerland, Luxemburg, now Panama – data leaks of unprecedented dimensions seem to be the one weapon against international tax evasion schemes and tax base erosion that actually, to some extent, works. What does this mean for fiscal law? Could a shift towards more transparency help overcoming the growing gap between legality and legitimacy in international tax law? Should states as a general rule abandon their usage of keeping taxpayer information secret?

Cultural defense policies are mushrooming in Europe, as refugees and migrants from Africa, Central Asia and the Middle East ­- many of them Muslims ­- keep coming to our shores in unprecedented numbers. Can the “cultural defense” of majorities be reconciled with liberal values and, if so, how?

The CJEU’s decision “Schrems v. Commissioner” has been hailed as an epochal event in the history of data protection and privacy in Europe. What did the judges actually say? What does their decision entail? How to move on? Legal experts from both sides of the Atlantic discuss the merits and implications of this momentous decision.

800,000 migrants are expected to apply for asylum in Germany in 2015 – the highest number ever, four times as many as in 2014. This unprecedented jump gives urgency to the current debate about the fairness of the distribution of responsibility for refugees in Europe. Is the alleged “hegemon” being left in the lurch by its EU partners? Is the German demand of relief justified as a matter of solidarity among EU member states? What needs to be done to address the imbalances in the current system?

The EU affects the lives of many people in ways they perceive as profoundly unjust. Lives are dramatically affected by the policies of austerity, widely understood to be EU-imposed. With the Court of Justice appearing to stand for its own authority and EU autonomy at any cost; with migrants attempting to reach fortress Europe and drowning en masse as the EU cuts back its rescue services; and with economic inequalities in the Member States reaching new heights, could it be that there is a justice deficit in Europe, exacerbated by the European Union? There is an urgent need to address the question of justice as an EU objective openly and without reservation, and not to permit nationalists and Eurosceptics to monopolize this debate. On the occasion of the newly launched book “Europe’s Justice Deficit?”, co-edited by EU constitutional law scholars Dimitry Kochenov, Gráinne de Búrca and Andrew Williams, we put this question up for debate.

Entscheidungsarchitekturen zu gestalten, ist als Instrument staatlicher Regulierung in Kontinentaleuropa heftig umstritten – nicht zuletzt unter Jurist_innen. Woher rührt diese Skepsis? Der Jurist Emanuel Towfigh und der Ökonom Christian Traxler vermuten den Grund dafür weniger im Inhalt als in der Methodik – Nudging steht quer zu den Kategorien, in denen kontinentaleuropäische Jurist_innen zu denken gewöhnt sind. Wir stellen diese provokante Position in der zweiten Runde der Nudging-Debatte auf dem Verfassungsblog zur Diskussion.

Der jüngste Kopftuch-Beschluss des Bundesverfassungsgerichts hat eine lebhafte Kontroverse über das spannungsreiche Verhältnis der beiden Senate des Gerichts entfacht. Wie sind die Abweichungen des Ersten Senats vom der Linie des Zweiten 2003 zu bewerten? Hätte er das Plenum anrufen müssen?

Die EU kann vorerst nicht wie geplant der Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention beitreten. Dafür hat der EuGH in seinem am 18. Dezember 2014 veröffentlichten Gutachten gesorgt. Was ist von dieser Entscheidung zu halten? Wie wirkt sie sich auf den Schutz der Menschenrechte in Europa aus? Und wie geht es mit dem Beitritt der Union weiter?

Parliamentary second chambers are a common, yet peculiar feature of constitutions worldwide. Their diversity of design and the assorted roles they play in majoritarian democracies are reason enough for a comparative analysis, but there is more: Bicameralism – and its discontents – is in the air. Countries within and outside of Europe have recently made attempts to reform or abolish their respective upper houses. We have asked distinguished scholars from all of these nations to provide us with accounts of the debates in their countries.

In wenigen Tagen wird sich herausstellen, ob Schottland Teil des Vereinigten Königreichs bleiben wird oder nicht. Es könnte wirklich passieren, was es bisher noch nie gab: Aus einem EU-Mitgliedsstaat werden zwei. Oder, werden sie? Während EU-Kommission und viele nationale Regierungen sich bemühen, die Perspektiven Schottlands auf eine fortbestehende EU-Mitgliedschaft düster zu malen, stellen sich viele Europarechts-Expert_innen auf den gegenteiligen Standpunkt – darunter Sionaidh Douglas-Scott, EU-Rechts-Professorin aus Oxford. Wir stellen ihre Position in einem Online-Symposium zur Debatte.

Is “nudging” – as outlined by Cass Sunstein and Richard H. Thaler in their controversial concept of libertarian paternalism – a modern and efficient tool of governance or a dangerous attack on freedom and individual autonomy? Legal, economic and other experts will discuss the political, ethical and constitutional ramifications of nudging in a two-day conference at Berlin, beginning with a public lecture delivered by Cass Sunstein.

The German Council of Science and Humanities’ report on “Prospects of Legal Scholarship in Germany. Current Situation, Analyses, Recommendations” has sparked a lively debate amongst legal scholars in Germany on how to adapt legal education and legal scholarship to the challenges of increasing internationalization of the law. With this symposium, Verfassungsblog seeks to start a debate beyond national borders on the topics addressed by the report.

Das Stichwort Investitionsschutz hat sich in der Öffentlichkeit zu einem regelrechten Reizthema entwickelt – ausgelöst vor allem durch die Verhandlungen zum so genannten Transatlantischen Handels- und Investitionspartnerschaftsabkommen (TTIP) zwischen EU und USA. Um auf die wachsende Kritik zu reagieren, hat die EU-Kommission am 27. März 2014 eine Online-Konsultation eröffnet. Dies nehmen wir zum Anlass für ein Online-Symposium, in dem Völker-, Europa- und Staatsrechtler_innen zu dem Konsultationsdokument der Kommission kritisch Stellung nehmen. Kuratiert wird das Symposium von ISABEL FEICHTNER und MARKUS KRAJEWSKI.

Das Bundesverfassungsgericht hat – zum ersten Mal in seiner Geschichte – den Europäischen Gerichtshof um eine Vorabentscheidung gebeten: Es geht um die umstrittene Ankündigung der Europäischen Zentralbank, zur Rettung des Euro unbegrenzt Staatsanleihen wackelnder Eurostaaten anzukaufen. Was ist von dieser Entscheidung zu halten? Welche Folgen könnte sie nach sich ziehen? Und wie wird das Verfahren am Ende ausgehen?

Wenn EU-Mitgliedsstaaten wie Ungarn die Grundwerte der Union verletzen und ihre Pflichten aus Artikel 2 des EU-Vertrages brechen, kann die Union dagegen wenig tun. Kim Lane Scheppele hat einen Vorschlag gemacht, wie dies geändert werden könnte: Die Kommission sollte die Möglichkeit bekommen, in solchen Fällen ein spezielles Vertragsverletzungsverfahren einzuleiten.
Wir stellen Kims Vorschlag zur Diskussion und werden in den kommenden Wochen Europarechtlerinnen und Europarechtler bitten, dazu Stellung zu nehmen.

Griechenland schaut in den Abgrund seit Ausbruch der Finanzkrise 2008. In den letzten Wochen jedoch hat sich die Situation noch einmal dramatisch zugespitzt – Griechenland befindet sich in einer veritablen Verfassungskrise. Die strafrechtliche Verfolgung der neonazistischen Partei „Goldene Morgenröte“, drastische Einschnitte in der Finanzierung des Universitätssystems, die Formierung eines neuen, oppressiven Arbeitsrechts – dies sind nur einige Beispiele. Griechenland ist zugleich ein paradigmatischer Fall, um die Auswirkungen massiver sozialer und ökonomischer Umwälzungen auf das Verfassungsrecht zu beobachten. In den kommenden Wochen werden eine Reihe von Beiträgen auf die volatile und explosive Situation in Griechenland ein Licht werfen.

Was dürfen die US-Geheimdienste in Deutschland tun? Was dürfen wir sie tun lassen? Und was können wir tun, wenn sie tun, was sie nicht tun dürfen? Eine Interview- und Beitrags-Serie über die NSA-Affäre und ihre rechtlichen und rechtspolitischen Folgen.

Droht der bevorstehende Beitritt zur Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention zu einem “trojanischen Pferd” für die Europäische Union zu werden? Daniel Thym hat mit seinem Beitrag auf dem Verfassungsblog eine Kontroverse ausgelöst.

Jedes Jahr im Frühling führt der Verfassungsblog ein ganz besonderes Interview. Die Reihe beginnt 2013 mit Saskia Sassen und Richard Sennett. Das Soziologen-Ehepaar aus New York prognostiziert, wie Europa als politische Institution in zehn Jahren aussehen wird.

Das ungarische Parlament hat ein Paket von Verfassungsänderungen verabschiedet, das das Verfassungsgericht als konstitutionelles Korrektiv zu Viktor Orbáns Zweidrittelmehrheitsregierung faktisch neutralisiert. An Protestnoten aus Straßburg und Brüssel hat es nicht gefehlt, aber ausgerichtet haben sie offenbar nichts. Die EU scheint ebenso wenig wie der Europarat institutionell in der Lage zu sein, auf Vorgänge mitgliedsstaatlicher Verfassungserosion wie in Ungarn oder in Rumänien eine angemessene Antwort zu geben. Wenn in einem EU-Mitgliedsstaat die Verfassungsstaatlichkeit erodiert, dann ist das nicht nur dessen eigenes Problem, sondern eines der gesamten EU und all ihrer Mitgliedsstaaten. Was können diese tun?

In der Eurokrise scheint das Gröbste überstanden, und der konstitutionelle Reformeifer in der EU lässt ebenfalls spürbar nach. Um so dringlicher ist es, die wissenschaftliche Debatte über die Zukunft Europas lebendig zu halten. Wir sprechen mit Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern aus Rechts- und Politikwissenschaften über ihre Vision von Europa 2023: Wie wird die Europäische Union in zehn Jahren verfasst sein? Welche konstitutionellen Endzustände sind wahrscheinlich, welche wünschenswert? Wird es sie überhaupt noch geben? Wie handlungsfähig wird die EU sein? Wie friedlich? Wie solidarisch? Und wie gerecht? Über diese Fragen diskutieren wir mit unseren Interviewpartnern, und ihre Antworten werden wir an dieser Stelle in den nächsten Wochen veröffentlichen.

Das Landgericht Köln hat die Beschneidung von Jungen als strafbare Körperverletzung qualifiziert. Was ist von dieser Entscheidung zu halten? Wie verhält sie sich zur Religionsfreiheit von Juden und Muslimen?

Wenn EU-Mitgliedsstaaten die Grundrechte ihrer Bürger nicht mehr schützen können oder wollen – was kann die EU da tun? Eine Heidelberger Forschungsgruppe rund um Armin von Bogdandy schlägt vor, dem EuGH die Aufgabe anzuvertrauen, Bürger gegen ihren eigenen Staat zu schützen.