nam 22 uu 4500 10.59704/f939d0d6f61a0d64 DE-Verfassungsblog cr||||| 260116s2026||||xx#|||||o|||| ||| 0|eng|| 10.59704/f939d0d6f61a0d64 doi eng 342 23 Riedl, Benedikt Author aut No Elegy for Ultra Vires - Why We Must Continue to Institutionalise Ultra Vires Review Even After Egenberger Riedl, Benedikt Verfassungsblog 2026-01-16 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Heiko Sauer recently diagnosed a “course correction in European constitutional law”. In light of the Second Senate’s Egenberger judgment, he paints a picture of a Federal Constitutional Court returning to calmer waters after the seismic aftershocks of the PSPP judgment. As tempting as this interpretation may be – driven by a desire for a harmonious cooperative relationship between courts –, it risks equating the mere absence of open conflict with structural pacification. I would like to both add to and modify Sauer’s thesis: institutionalisation, rather than the “deflation” of review, which just reduces its effectiveness, is the solution. CC BY-SA 4.0 Egenberger European constitutional law Ultra Vires Max Steinbeis Verfassungsblog gGmbH Verfassungsblog 2366-7044 https://verfassungsblog.de/egenberger-ultra-vires-proceduralisation/ raw object