<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/ http://dublincore.org/schemas/xmls/simpledc20021212.xsd">
  <dc:identifier>http://dx.doi.org/10.59704/77c70ab0dfbbeba1</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>https://verfassungsblog.de/marine-le-pen-ineligibility-judgment/</dc:identifier>
  <dc:title>Enforcing the Law of Democracy - On the Marine Le Pen Ineligibility Judgment and Its Implications</dc:title>
  <dc:creator>Aynès, Camille</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Bottini, Eleonora</dc:creator>
  <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
  <dc:date>2025-04-07</dc:date>
  <dc:type>electronic resource</dc:type>
  <dc:format>text/html</dc:format>
  <dc:subject>ddc:342</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Authoritarian Populism</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Le Pen Marine | 1968– | Rechtsanwältin; Politikerin</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Marine Le Pen</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Militant Democracy</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Rassemblement National</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>elections</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Le Pen Marine | 1968– | Rechtsanwältin; Politikerin</dc:subject>
  <dc:publisher>Verfassungsblog</dc:publisher>
  <dc:relation>Verfassungsblog--2366-7044</dc:relation>
  <dc:rights>CC BY-SA 4.0</dc:rights>
  <dc:description>It was a political bombshell. On Monday, 31 March 2025, Marine Le Pen, leader of the far-right party Rassemblement National (National Rally) in France, was convicted of misappropriation of public funds in the so-called “parliamentary assistants” case. The judgment is marked by an unusual degree of judicial creativity, particularly in its underlying conception of democracy, which may be understood through the lens of militant democracy. Although it does not constitute a political judgment in the traditional, partisan sense, its constitutional and symbolic significance is substantial—and the backlash it has provoked against the judiciary is a cause for concern.</dc:description>
</dc>
