<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd">
  <responseDate>2026-05-14T20:36:50Z</responseDate>
  <request verb="GetRecord" identifier="oai:verfassungsblog.de/102752" metadataPrefix="oai_dc">https://verfassungsblog.de/oai/repository/</request>
  <GetRecord>
    <header>
      <identifier>oai:verfassungsblog.de/102752</identifier>
      <datestamp>2026-04-24T12:11:22Z</datestamp>
      <setSpec>posts</setSpec>
    </header>
    <metadata>
      <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/10.59704/2b2bfaa56c4b4ead</dc:identifier>
        <dc:identifier>https://verfassungsblog.de/a-constitutional-court-without-a-constitutional-compass/</dc:identifier>
        <dc:title>A Constitutional Court without a Constitutional Compass - Reflections on Commission v Hungary</dc:title>
        <dc:creator>van den Brink, Martijn</dc:creator>
        <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
        <dc:date>2026-04-24</dc:date>
        <dc:type>electronic resource</dc:type>
        <dc:format>text/html</dc:format>
        <dc:subject>ddc:342</dc:subject>
        <dc:subject>Art. 2 EUV</dc:subject>
        <dc:subject>Art. 2 TEU</dc:subject>
        <dc:subject>Commission v Hungary</dc:subject>
        <dc:subject>European Society</dc:subject>
        <dc:subject>Values</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>The ruling in the case of the Commission v. Hungary was eagerly awaited by many, but it will have come as a surprise to few. Public statements by prominent members of the EU Court of Justice indicated a clear desire to extend the applicability of Article 2 TEU. The Court’s findings regarding the Commission’s pleas concerning infringements of the various acts of secondary law are well-motivated, but its reasoning on Article 2 TEU clearly demonstrates the suffocating grip of EU constitutional orthodoxy.</dc:description>
      </dc>
    </metadata>
  </GetRecord>
</OAI-PMH>
