<?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/10.59704/30647cf4377db111</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>https://verfassungsblog.de/on-red-funding-lines-conceptualising-european-civil-society/</dc:identifier>
  <dc:title>On Red (Funding) Lines -  Conceptualising European Civil Society Between Court and Commission</dc:title>
  <dc:creator>Piep, Jakob</dc:creator>
  <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
  <dc:date>2026-06-29</dc:date>
  <dc:type>electronic resource</dc:type>
  <dc:format>text/html</dc:format>
  <dc:subject>ddc:342</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Article 2 TEU</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Commission v Hungary</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>EU</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>EU funds</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>EU values</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>European Society</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Pluralism</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>civil society</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>EU</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>One of the conceptually most significant innovations by the Court of Justice in Commission v. Hungary is its invocation of European society as a normative referent of the EU legal order, and the characterisation of that society through pluralism. This conceptual step has consequences that reach well beyond the judgement. I argue that it could place the Court on a potential collision course with the European Commission’s recent proposal to explicitly link EU civil society funding to compliance with the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU.</dc:description>
</dc>
