26 May 2020
, , , ,

National Courts Cannot Override CJEU Judgments

The European Union is a community based on the rule of law. The EU legal order is the backbone that holds the EU together, and the German Federal Constitutional Court’s ruling in Weiss poses a profound threat to that legal order. This threat goes far beyond the potential consequences of the Weiss ruling for European monetary policy. We write this statement to express our shared view that the German Court’s assertion that it can declare that a CJEU judgment “has no binding force in Germany” is untenable and must be forcefully rejected. We also write to challenge those versions of scholarship on constitutional pluralism and constitutional identity that would defend the authority of any national court to make such a ruling and that helped (even if unintentionally) encourage it to do so. Continue reading >>
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
,

Corona Constitutional #28: EuGH, der vertraute Unbekannte

Das umstrittene EZB-Urteil hat mal wieder ein Schlaglicht auf das komplizierte Verhältnis der Karlsruher Richterinnen und Richter zum EuGH geworfen. Auf der Beziehung lastet unter anderem, dass die beiden Institutionen sehr unterschiedlich arbeiten. Aber wie arbeitet der EuGH überhaupt? Darüber unterhält sich Alexander Melzer im heutigen Podcast mit CHRISTOPH KRENN von der Universität Wien. Continue reading >>
0
22 May 2020

Squaring the PSPP Circle

The PSPP judgment made a core problem of the European Union painfully visible as the supremacy of EU law clashed with national constitutional identity. There is, however, a possibility to square this circle: national apex courts could be empowered to issue ‘declarations of incompatibility’ under Article 4(2) TEU as an alternative to the disapplication of EU law. Continue reading >>
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 >>
21 May 2020

Herrschafts­legitimation und implizite Identitäts­kontrolle

Würde sich der Gerichtshof auf die Kritik des BVerfG konstruktiv einlassen und ein Kontrollniveau etablieren, das der demokratischen und rechtstaatlichen Struktur der Union wirklich gerecht wird, wäre er am Ende der eigentliche Gewinner. Auch Reservevorbehalte des BVerfG würden sich dann von selbst erledigen. Continue reading >>
21 May 2020

Verfassungsrichter in der Defensive

Huber, Voßkuhle, Lenaerts – drei Richter des BVerfG bzw. EuGH haben sich in der Presse zu Wort gemeldet, um ihre jeweiligen Urteile im Streit um die Ultra-Vires-Entscheidung zu verteidigen. Diese Reaktionen sind nicht nur rechtlich problematisch, sie drohen auch genau das zu verspielen, was die Richter zu bewahren suchen: das öffentliche Vertrauen und ihre Autorität. Continue reading >>
18 May 2020

Very Unkind Things about the German Constitutional Court’s Rebellion against the ECJ in the Quantitative Easing Case.

Much has been written about the recent German Constitutional Court (GCC) ruling which has essentially dismantled the 2018 judgement of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) over the legality of the ECB Quantitative Easing Program. Much more will be written. I will limit myself here in analysing what I believe is the “macroeconomic” essence of the ruling. 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 >>
17 May 2020

Ein Vertrags­verletzungs­verfahren als Deeskalations­instrument?

Könnte ein Vertragsverletzungsverfahren in dem Ultra-Vires-Fall eine weitere Stufe des Kooperationsverhältnisses von EuGH und BVerfG sein? Es könnte den prozessualen Mantel bilden, um den Dialog um den Inhalt der nationalen Verfassungsidentität der Bundesrepublik fortzuführen. Continue reading >>
0
Go to Top