Much of empirical research on European integration relies on data published by European Union (EU) institutions concerning the EU's laws and policies. However, despite wide disciplinary appeal and increasing regularization of data repositories such as Eur-Lex, researchers have so far not developed a standardized tool for accessing the main EU law databases. This research note presents the benefits of creating an open-source data collection infrastructure that takes advantage of the structured way in which data is published by the EU. I exemplify how software implementing this idea can be used by researchers.

The European Court of Justice is generally known to use its institutional role to advance European integration. Scholars have disagreed, however, on the extent to which the Court fears and anticipates negative reactions to its rulings from the Member States. Without a possibility to access internal deliberations, such strategic behaviour by the Court makes it empirically challenging to identify its preferences relative to other actors. I tackle this problem using an item-response theory model designed to estimate institutional preferences from cases concerning procedural and competence disputes. I find that the Court leans on average towards more supranational positions, while also systematically adjusting its rulings in response to Member States’ preferences. Controlling for these effects reveals the European Court of Justice to be even more partial to supranationalism than the pattern of its decisions suggests.

No abstract

We examine the emergence and evolution of docket control mechanisms in the preliminary ruling procedure. Using both legal and statistical analysis, we show that reasoned orders have increased dramatically since the mid-1990s, with courts in Italy and Central and Eastern member states being the most frequent targets. We argue that the trajectory of the European Court of Justice's docket policy is an indirect manifestation of its ascendant position as Europe's judicial powerhouse. Facing a rising caseload, the Court has sought to optimise the allocation of its resources by applying stricter admissibility criteria and by prioritising references raising novel legal issues. For domestic courts, this evolution means that references must satisfy higher standards of quality and originality, although the application of these standards is itself influenced by the size of the Court's backlog at the time of submission.

No abstract