The Community System: the Dual Character of Supranationalism

Weiler, Joseph H. H.

doi:10.1093/yel/1.1.267

Cited by 361 publications

(84 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Wenn man an die breite Rezeption von Weilers "dual character of supranationality" denkt, in dem der Zusammenhang zwischen dem Intergouvernementalismus des Rates und der supranationalen Rechtsordnung herausgearbeitet wurde (Weiler 1981), überrascht es, dass institutionalistische Arbeiten über Entscheidungsprozesse im Ministerrat dessen Kontext selten einbeziehen, so als handele es sich hier um ein Regime. Dabei kann die der Kommission mögliche Manipulation der Rückfallposition mindestens so wichtig wie ihr Vorschlagsrecht für die Abstimmung im Ministerrat sein.…”

Section: Schlussbemerkungunclassified

Die Einflussmöglichkeiten der Europäischen Kommission auf die europäische Politik

Schmidt

2001

PVS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Schlussbemerkungunclassified

Die Einflussmöglichkeiten der Europäischen Kommission auf die europäische Politik

Schmidt

2001

PVS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…We view the ECJ, not unlike Weiler (1981Weiler ( , 1991Weiler ( , 1994 and Burley and Mattli (1993), as generally working to enhance the autonomy of the EC legal system, autonomy that is then exercised to promote the interests of transnational society and to facilitate the construction of supranational governance. The court does not'work in the interests of member governments, except in the very loose sense in which those interests can be construed as being in conformity with the treaty's purposes broadly-not narrowly-conceived.…”

Section: Dispute Resolution and The Dynamics Of Supranational Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Constructing a Supranational Constitution: Dispute Resolution and Governance in the European Community

1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

N o international organization in world history has attracted as much scholarly attention as the European Community (EC).l The reason is straightforward: The EC has evolved from a relatively traditional (albeit multifaceted) interstate system into a quasi-federal polity. In a word, Europe has integrated, as the linkages between politics on the EC level and politics on the national level have expanded in scope and deepened in intensity. Scholars working in diverse fields, including public law, international relations, and comparative politics, have been fascinated by the integration process, not least because of the challenge of understanding the reciprocal effect, over time, of international and domestic systems of governance.Current theoretical disagreements about how to understand European integration are largely disputes between intergovernmentalists, whose imagery is drawn from the international regime literature (Garrett 1992;Keohane and Hoffmann 1991;Moravcsik 1991Moravcsik , 1993Taylor 1983), and supranationalists, whose imagery is often federalist (Burley and Mattli 1993; Leibfried and Pierson, eds., 1995;Marks, Hooghe, and Blank 1996;Sandholtz 1993Sandholtz ,1996Sbragia 1993;Stone Sweet and Sandholtz 1997). Intergovernmentalists accord relative priority to member state governmentsrepresentatives of the national interest-who bargain with one another in EC fora to fix the terms and limits of integration. Supranationalists (especially the heirs of neofunctionalism), accord relative priority to EC institutions-representatives of the interests of a nascent transnational society-who work with public and priAlec Stone Sweet is Associate Professor and Thomas L. Brunell is a Ph.D. candidate, Department of Politics and Society, School of Social Sciences, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-5100.The authors are grateful to the National Science Foundation, Grant No. SBR-9412531, the National Endowment for the Humanities, Grant No. FA-32480-94, the European Court of Justice, and the Robert Schuman Centre of the European University Institute for their support of this research. We also wish to thank James Caporaso, Lisa Conant, Russell Dalton, Harry Eckstein, Jonathon Golub, Bernard Grofman, Ronald Jepperson, Gary King, and Wayne Sandholtz for helpful comments.Although "European Union" is now commonly used to denote the European polity, we use "European Community" throughout. Formally, the EC remains distinct from the EU, and the EC is the most inclusive term for how the organization and its legal system function most of the time.vate actors at both the European and national levels to remove barriers to integration and to expand the domain of supranational governance. This paper is implicated in these disputes. One of our claims is that, on crucial points, the intergovernmentalists have gotten it wrong.More important, we propose a theory of European legal integration, the process by which Europe has constructed a transnational rule-of-law polity. The theory integrates, as interdependent causal factors, contrac...

show abstract

“…We do not read the story of European integration as one of stop-and-go, at least not in any general or comprehensive sense. At the height of De Gaulle's power in the 1960s, the ECJ moved aggressively to 'constitutionalize' the treaties (Stein 1981;Weiler 1981Weiler , 1991. In the worst days of 'Eurosclerosis' in the 1970s, levels of intra-EC trade and other forms of exchange soared.…”

Section: Why Movement Occursmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This provision has served as the legal basis for EC action in policy domains not specifically mentioned in the Treaty. Perhaps more important in practice, the ECJ has interpreted the Treaty so as to permit the expansion of supranational policy domains (Weiler 1981). Again: the Court does not choose its questions; it responds to the cases brought, frequently, by transactors seeking clearer EC rules or enforcement of existing rules.…”

Section: Institutionalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%