04 June 2025
Othering in EU Law
The so-called migrant crisis has been instrumentalized to promote ideas such as “massive invasion” and “the great replacement” – narratives that frame migrants as threats to public security and cultural identity. This rhetoric forms part of a broader phenomenon of othering, in which legal mechanisms are used to exclude and marginalize migrant populations. This text explores how EU migration law actively contributes to this process by reinforcing exclusionary narratives and practices. Drawing on postcolonial scholarship and the concept of borderization, it argues that EU legal frameworks regulate certain groups as undesirable or excessive, echoing colonial patterns of control. These exclusionary dynamics are not merely reflections of societal bias but are structurally embedded in EU law itself. Continue reading >>
1 
30 May 2025
Challenging Strasbourg
Since 22 May 2025, a disquieting letter has been circulating: nine leading EU politicians are calling for “a new and open-minded conversation about the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights,” with particular reference to migration. The signatories seek to explore whether “the Court, in some cases, has extended the scope of the Convention on Human Rights too far compared with the original intentions behind the Convention, thus shifting the balance between the interests that should be protected.” The letter raises not only political and ethical questions but also significant legal concerns. Continue reading >>10 January 2025
“This Undermines the State’s Promise of Equality”
Five Questions to Dana Schmalz Continue reading >>
0
25 November 2024
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
In its recent decision in ST v Frontex the CJEU missed once again an opportunity to review Frontex's conduct in light of human rights standards. The decision is the latest in a series of key decisions concerning EU human rights responsibility over the course of the past year, including WS and Others v. Frontex, Hamoudi v. Frontex, Sea Watch v Frontex, as well as Kočner and KS and KD. This contribution explains how some of these cases perpetuate the shortcomings of the EU’s human rights responsibility regime, while others show the Court’s willingness and ability to redress these. Continue reading >>
0
27 September 2024
“Not only legally dubious but also ineffective”
Five Questions to Lilian Tsourdi Continue reading >>16 September 2024
Flying Blind
A quarter of a billion euros. That was the final price tag the last time German politicians and constitutional law professors assured us that a controversial German idea was compatible with EU law. Yet the Autobahn car toll for foreigners only pushed through by the Bavarian regional conservatives (CSU) and passed by the Federal government grand coalition of Conservatives and Social Democrats was – quite predictably from the outset – contrary to European law and cost German taxpayers many millions of euros in contractual penalties following clarification by the ECJ in 2019. The way the current refugee debate in Germany is handled could end up costing Germany, i.e. all of us, much more – not so much in euros, but in trust in the reliability of Germany in general, as an EU Member State, and more generally trust in the reliability of the law. Continue reading >>
0
06 May 2024
Unconstitutionality à l’Anglaise
After long and tortuous proceedings in Parliament, the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024 finally received Royal Assent on Thursday 25 April. There are so many problems with the Act and they are so fundamental that there has been speculation that the courts might refuse to apply some of the Act’s provisions. In this blogpost, I suggest that aside from the ‘hard-line’ approach of striking down or disapplying the statute in whole or in part, the courts also have a ‘soft-line’ option of declaring its unconstitutionality without denying its status as binding law. I explain how such an intervention might fit into the constitutional tradition of the UK and what may make it attractive in the case at hand. Continue reading >>
0
22 March 2024
Studying Migrations and Borders from a Pluridisciplinary Perspective
I chose for years to consider migrations and borders from a pluridisciplinary perspective. Such a pluridisciplinary approach reveals to be demanding: it needs both to be developed with discipline, and to be opened to wanderings. You have to accept to be confronted with personal controversies, to be faced with internal discourse on the method. Continue reading >>
0
04 March 2024
Re-Imagining the European (Political) Community through Migration Law
The constant portrayal of migration as an exceptional and problematic phenomenon fuels public anxieties and makes deterrence and harshness seem like the only effective political approaches to managing global migration. By contrast, positive visions of how a society of immigration needs to look like for all members of society to benefit are scarce. Yet to counter apocalyptic scenarios, we need not only such a positive vision but also a theory of societal action that helps to realize it. This blog post offers such a vision and theory that is grounded in the normative and legal framework of the European Union. It argues that we should conceptualize the European society as an inclusive, participatory, and self-reflexive community that is based on constitutional principles as enshrined in Art. 2 TEU. To realize this vision, we must understand practices of claiming and defending human rights not as an overreach into the political latitude of the legislator but as a joint practice of (political) community-building. Continue reading >>04 March 2024
The Place of Numbers in Migration Debates
The governance of migration, in particular of asylum migration, is caught in the contrast between the political relevance of numbers, and the individuum-based structure of the law. For politics, it matters how many persons arrive, require shelter, enter procedures. For the legal assessment, however, numbers mostly do not matter: The right not to be rejected at the border, the right to access an asylum procedure and to shelter during that procedure are individual rights that are independent from the overall number of arrivals. This contrast is visible in periodical debates about a maximum number of asylum seekers per year, or proposals to abolish the individual right to protection altogether. Such proposals disregard that individual rights to protection are enshrined not just in constitutional law, but also in European and international law, and for good reason. However, it is worth taking the perspective of numbers seriously – while respecting the individual right to protection. Continue reading >>
0