Netto, neutral, egal?

Seit Ende März berechtigt ein neuer Art. 143h GG den Bund dazu, Sondervermögen u.a. „für zusätzliche Investitionen zur Erreichung der Klimaneutralität bis zum Jahr 2045“ zu errichten. Wir wollen die „Klimaneutralität“ im neuen Art. 143h GG zum Anlass nehmen, um zu reflektieren, ob zentrale klimapolitische Konzepte vom Gesetzgeber und von der Rechtsprechung wissenschaftlich sinnvoll zur Anwendung gebracht wurden. Damit geht es uns letztlich um die Frage, welche Bedeutung dem Konzept der Klimaneutralität im Recht zugewiesen wird und werden sollte – also um das Verhältnis von Klimawissenschaft und Klimapolitik im Recht.

Why bother with legal reasoning?

Hindsight can make one look naive. Following the Opinion of Advocate General Collins in Commission v Malta, I argued that ‘the rhetorical battle over citizenship by investment has been won by the EU institutions’ but that ‘emotions and rhetoric alone should not decide legal battles’. Of course, I should have known better: the central dogma on which a large lineage of EU citizenship cases rests – that EU citizenship is destined to be the fundamental status of nationals – is a rhetorical device without basis in EU law. And once again, in the Commission v Malta ruling of 29 April 2025, on whether Malta was in breach of its obligations under EU law by maintaining and promoting a citizenship by investment (CBI) scheme, the Court prioritised rhetoric and political expediency over solid legal argumentation.

EU Citizenship’s New Essentialism

The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that the Maltese citizenship by investment violates EU law. The Court thereby hints – for the first time – that EU citizenship bond is not only legal in nature. Citizenship has suddenly become a legal but also some other connection between a person and the state. In other words, the law is not enough to make one a citizen, as any such citizenship might fall short of ‘solidarity and good faith’ test at the EU level. This newly-invented extra-legal rule put thousands of Europeans in limbo. This blog will locate some key steps marking this development and offer a possible presentation of the recent decades of EU law in three broad steps, to show how we got where we are.

Criminalising Boycott Calls

Can a call for boycott ever amount to hate speech? In an era of deepening political divides, the question is increasingly influenced by geopolitics rather than human rights law: The Turkish government's criminalization of boycott calls in response to protests against political repression highlights the dangers of weaponizing hate speech laws, echoing a global double standard that undermines the universal application of human rights protections.

Falsches Vertrauen

Die Rechtstaatlichkeit der Türkei ist in den letzten Wochen erneut unter starken Beschuss gekommen. Aus Deutschland folgen jedoch weiterhin keine Konsequenzen. Wenn der Grundsatz des gegenseitigen Vertrauens im Auslieferungsrecht nicht ständig überprüft wird, gefährdet dies die Integrität der Justiz. Eine Aussetzung von Auslieferungen in die Türkei könnte dem Rechtsstaatsbedürfnis beider Länder dienen und eine längst überfällige Neubewertung der justiziellen Bedingungen anstoßen.

All This for »Primacy«?

There is hardly any clearer picture of the “tragic” pitfall in which the EU languishes than the last evolutions of the rule of law’s saga, the most recent of which is the C-448/23 case pending before the ECJ. The AG’s Opinion delivered on March 11th shows signs of the decline the EU suffers for the multiple crises occurred and for its reluctance to tackle politically, and open-mindedly, the manifold interrogatives that follow.

Elisabeth Mann Borgese

In public international law circles, especially those indulging in the law of the sea, Elisabeth Mann Borgese, the youngest daughter born to German Nobel Prize-winning novelist Thomas Mann in 1918, is perhaps best known for her pioneering work on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Her convictions and contributions to the UNCLOS focused on social justice, equitable access to resources, and environmental protection. By offering a glimpse into her contributions to the UNCLOS, this post highlights how Elisabeth Mann Borgese’s ideology – influenced in part by her cautious feminist beliefs – permeates her legacy.

Harvard Under Attack

Seit dem Amtsantritt von Donald Trump als 47. Präsident der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika vergeht kaum eine Woche, in der wissenschaftliche Einrichtungen nicht attackiert werden. Die US-Regierung macht nun geltend, dass Harvard – und andere Universitäten – gegen Title VI des Civil Rights Acts verstießen, indem sie als „Brutstätten für Antisemitismus“ dienten. Das wirft allerlei verfassungsrechtliche Fragen auf.