“…This review takes a considerably different view on the process by focusing not so much on the reified collective actors, the Court, the state(s), and so forth, that were trapped in this so-called spillover mechanism, but rather on the collective action of the specific transnational entrepreneurs, networks, and microcosms that triggered this yet very uncertain legal revolution. Drawing from well-established theoretical tools and empirical strategies (Bourdieu 1987, Abbott 1988) that have already been applied to the study of international law (Dezalay & Garth 1996, we engage in a more sociologically informed understanding of European integration through law (Cohen & Vauchez 2007, in particular by remodeling Bourdieu's field theory (Bourdieu 1996) for the purpose of studying transnational social spaces (on Bourdieu's field theory and the study of transnational processes, see Bigo & Madsen 2011; on the sociological turn in European studies, see Favell & Guiraudon 2009, Georgakakis 2009, Saurugger & Mérand 2010. In what follows, we argue that the general dynamics of the emerging European www.annualreviews.org • The Social Construction of Law field of power, as well as the socioprofessional profiles of the members of the Court, strongly determined the early path toward constitutionalization, here understood as an open-ended process in which the early decisions of the Court have been retrospectively reconstructed as a revolution by a transnational community of legal professionals gaining momentum in the nascent European legal field.…”