Die Bedeutung von Interpretationsmethoden und Dogmatik in der Entscheidungspraxis des Bundesverfassungsgerichts

Kranenpohl, Uwe

doi:10.3790/staa.48.3.387

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Otherwise, progress towards further integration would hinge exclusively on the decisions of the Council and the Parliament regarding secondary law. In fact, Kranenpohl reports a similar finding from his interviews with German constitutional judges, who state that judgments have to remain ambiguous in order to allow for appropriate judgments in the future (Kranenpohl 2009). If even national constitutional judges see themselves as being faced with contradictory demands to provide stability while remaining flexible enough for future imponderables, this must be all the more relevant within a dynamically developing and expanding union.…”

Section: Adjudication As a Source Of Legal Uncertaintymentioning

confidence: 74%

The European Court of Justice and the Policy Process

Schmidt

2018

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Court of Justice is one of the most important actors in the process of European integration. Political science still struggles to understand its significance, with recent scholarship emphasizing how closely rulings reflect member states’ preferences. In this book, I argue that the implications of the supremacy and direct effect of the EU law have still been overlooked. As it constitutionalizes an intergovernmental treaty, the European Union has a detailed set of policies inscribed into its constitution that are extensively shaped by the Court’s case law. If rulings have constitutional status, their impact is considerable, even if the Court only occasionally diverts from member states’ preferences. By focusing on the four freedoms of goods, services, persons, and capital, as well as citizenship rights, the book analyses how the Court’s development of case law has ascribed a broad meaning to these freedoms. The constitutional status of this case law constrains policymaking at the European and member-state levels. Different case studies show how major pieces of EU legislation cannot move beyond case law but have to codify its principles. Judicialization is important in the EU. It also directly constrains member-state policies. Court rulings oriented towards individual disputes are difficult to translate into general policies, and into administrative practices. Policy options are thereby withdrawn from majoritarian decision-making. As the Court cannot be overruled, short of a Treaty change, its case law casts a long shadow over policymaking in the European Union and its member states, undermining the legitimacy of this political order.

show abstract

Section: Adjudication As a Source Of Legal Uncertaintymentioning

confidence: 74%

The European Court of Justice and the Policy Process

Schmidt

2018

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The ECJ, therefore, typically requires complex individual assessments in light of its own interpretative guidelines, but leaves it to national courts to apply these guidelines to the facts of a particular case. Moreover, it also has to keep European law, being constitutional law, dynamic to respond adequately to new conflict constellations – a necessity relevant for all constitutional courts (Kranenpohl , p. 389). For the ECJ, flexibility also relates to its self‐perceived role as motor of European integration.…”

Section: The Separation Of Powers At the National And The Supranationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Free movement, the welfare state, and the European Union's over‐constitutionalization: Administrating contradictions

Blauberger¹,

Schmidt

2017

Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Union (EU) has to reconcile free movement rights with national welfare states. Case law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has broadened rights to welfare of economically inactive or marginally active EU citizens. Applying the Court's jurisprudence, which is vague and specific at the same time, poses serious challenges for national administrations. Vague criteria for individual assessments have to be translated into mass procedures. And legislative corrections of the case law are often foreclosed given the EU's skewed separation of powers and the overconstitutionalization of European law, where crucial policy choices are taken by the Court's Treaty interpretation. We compare the British and the German approaches and show that ECJ case law impacts through different channels, but triggers similar challenges for national administrations.

show abstract

Soziales Europa: Der Interpretationsspielraum des Gerichtshofes der Europäischen Union

Schmidt

Blauberger

2015

Ein Soziales Europa Ist Möglich

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Die Bedeutung von Interpretationsmethoden und Dogmatik in der Entscheidungspraxis des Bundesverfassungsgerichts

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

The European Court of Justice and the Policy Process

The European Court of Justice and the Policy Process

Free movement, the welfare state, and the European Union's over‐constitutionalization: Administrating contradictions

Soziales Europa: Der Interpretationsspielraum des Gerichtshofes der Europäischen Union

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About