Nationalistic discourse is often associated with the flag waving of popular culture, political views of extremist right-wing parties or the routine rhetoric of `us' versus `them', pervading social life in general. However, nationalistic discourse is to be found even in academic writings by the professional elite of lawyers, who readily resort to ideological topoi of national identity and culture to support legal argument. Reporting from a comprehensive study on Danish academic and public debate on European human rights law, this article explores how the legal community of Denmark reacts emotionally and ideologically to legal integration in Europe. It is argued that the somewhat heated debate reflects points of instability within the social class of Danish jurists, who are engaged in a hegemonic struggle to construct or sustain positions of power within a national legal system under radical change.

No abstract