Search
Generic filters
25 May 2020
,

The Bundesbank is under a legal obligation to ignore the PSPP Judgment of the Bundes­verfassungs­gericht

If there is a situation undermining the rule of law, then it is exactly this: The Bundesbank is under a legal obligation to ignore the PSPP Judgment of the Bundesverfassungsgericht (under EU law), and the Bundesbank is under a legal obligation to follow the PSPP Judgment of the Bundesverfassungsgericht (under German constitutional law). How has it come to this? Continue reading >>
22 May 2020

Watching the Peacock Dance

Why is Viktor Orbán suddenly making nice with the ECJ and closing the Röszke camp? I don't know. But I have some suspicions. Continue reading >>
0
21 May 2020

Law or Politics?

Why should a proportionality assessment of an instrument of monetary policy, which no one doubts is at least in part designed to increase money supply and combat deflation, examine that instrument’s effect on economic policy? There are two different answers—one under EU law, the other under German law. Continue reading >>
19 May 2020

Why Egenberger Could Be Next

Soon, the Federal Constitutional Court will decide on the Egenberger case that raises important questions at the intersection of anti-discrimination law and religious policy. The decision is an opportunity to address critical questions to the European Court of Justice – a court that lacks dogmatic subtlety and sensitivity with regard to religion and cultural policy as an analysis of its case law shows. Continue reading >>
18 May 2020

When Managed Recognition Turns into Outright Denial

Kalypso Nicolaïdis has referred to managed recognition as an exercise in legal empathy mediated through conditions and limits, and resulting from the ‘eternal dance of law and politics’. The notion lends a useful lens to capture the relation between European top courts. In the version of that relation emerging from the PSPP judgment, this lens magnifies a disruption, a side effect, and an alternative course. Continue reading >>
15 May 2020

Is Egenberger next?

When judges must rely on newspapers to clarify a decision they decided a week before, something seems to have gone wrong. However, while the BVerfG seems to be taken aback by the storm of indignation that burst upon them since last week’s PSPP decision, the judges remain adamant in their criticism of the CJEU. Luxembourg should perhaps even fear another ultra vires decision. Continue reading >>
06 May 2020

Fight, flight or fudge?

Karlsruhe’s latest judgement on the PSPP moves the German state closer to a full-fledged fight with either the EU or its own Constitutional Court by threatening to prohibit Germany’s participation in a programme that has existential significance for the euro. To resolve this dilemma, perhaps nothing short of a revolutionary moment would be required. Continue reading >>
05 May 2020

Verschroben verhoben!

Dies ist keine glückliche Lektüre. Selten hat ein Urteil des BVerfG so traurig gestimmt. Nicht weil man das inhaltliche Anliegen des Gerichts nicht teilen könnte. Wohl aber, weil es eine an Verschrobenheit grenzende Weltferne und Selbstüberschätzung offenbart, von der man trotz aller gegenteiligen Anzeichen bis zum Schluss hoffen musste, sie möge dem Gericht und uns allen erspart bleiben. Alt ist das Gericht geworden, andere sind über es hinausgewachsen und so versteht es die Welt und seine Rolle in ihr nicht mehr. Continue reading >>
24 April 2020

It’s not about Bathroom Policies, it’s about Constitutional Principles

The United States Supreme Court is expected to soon deliver its judgment in the first transgender rights case before it. In the absence of federal laws protecting transgender persons from discrimination, the case revolves around the question whether the prohibition of discrimination ‘because of … sex’ transgender discrimination. The US Supreme Court appears to turn this into a question of political deliberation, bathroom policies and dress codes. The ECJ, on the other hand, instead of getting lost in policy discussions, has already in 1996 recognized the protection of transgender persons against discrimination based on the core constitutional principle of equality. The ECJ’s approach does in fact have a foothold under US case law and the US Supreme Court could seize the opportunity to bring transgender persons closer to enjoying the same rights as the general population. Continue reading >>
0
15 April 2020

Infringement Procedures in the Time of COVID-19

In the last weeks, members of the European Parliament and observers in the legal and academic community have, explicitly or implicitly, criticised the European Commission and the Court of Justice for their handling of ongoing infringement procedures. Put simply, the two institutions have been criticised for moving the existing cases forward, despite the fact that certain countries (first Italy, then followed by almost all other Member States) are in lockdown and, consequently, their administrations are unable to effectively respond. Continue reading >>
0
Go to Top