Trump nominated Emil Bove III, a former attorney of his, to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. The Bove nomination signals a turn away from the Federalist Society, the signature institution of the conservative legal movement. With it, the radical forces of the New Right movement are now making inroads into the inherently conservative judiciary. This is a development that could be a key step in consolidating Trump's power.
Hungary appears to be assuming the role of a Trojan horse in the European Union, advancing the interests of foreign powers. Of particular concern is Hungary’s conduct in the field of the Common Foreign and Security Policy, especially in light of its obstruction of EU sanctions against Russia. Thus far, the EU’s conventional instruments have proven insufficient in curbing Hungary’s veto strategy. For this reason, I propose a path that is both legally feasible and politically realistic: a reinterpretation of Article 7 TEU that would allow for a targeted use of the instrument.
This blog post aims at briefly addressing the issue of hunting as it is regulated in EU biodiversity law using legal ecofeminism as method of analysis. It starts from a reflection on ecofeminism as related to hunting, then argues that EU law, including the EU Charter is inherently anthropocentric, and highlights the ambiguities of EU biodiversity law. By referring to a judgment rendered by the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) on the conservation of wolves in 2019, this post encourages an ecofeminist legal reading of EU biodiversity law. E
A Recap of Supreme Court’s Last Term
Zur letzten Sitzungsperiode des US Supreme Courts
Two recent fisheries disputes reveal that the “best available science” standard is neither singular nor straightforward. Instead, science emerges as contested terrain, shaped by power, uncertainty, and competing truths. These cases could have important implications for the future application of the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights and its growing relevance for biodiversity and animal protection.
The intellectual and institutional architectures built around democracy are under pressure – and evolving: Germany reformed its fiscal constitution in March, Europe’s Stability and Growth Pact is undergoing a stress test, and in the United States, the White House is questioning the independence of monetary policy. Historically, democracy has an ambivalent reputation: Plato described it as both the freest and the most unstable of governments. But how far and in what ways can democracy be limited before it loses its democratic nature?
On 17 June 2025, Advocate General Emiliou delivered his opinion in the second referral of the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) to the CJEU in the case “Pelham” – also known as “Metall auf Metall” (Case C-590/23). He defines “pastiche” – currently the most controversial concept of European copyright law – and makes a fundamental statement on EU copyright law and its relationship to freedom of the arts as guaranteed by Art. 13 CFR.The InfoSoc Directive, which is at the heart of EU copyright law, is too restrictive with regard to the artistic use of copyright-protected works and therefore not compatible with the Charter’s freedom of the arts. Emiliou’s opinion is a breakthrough. It grounds copyright in freedom of the arts and paves the way for a new perspective on the relationship between copyright and artistic freedom.
On 5 June 2025, AG Ćapeta delivered her opinion in case C-769/22, raising a pivotal question for the EU’s constitutional future: Can Article 2 TEU serve as a standalone provision in infringement proceedings? While the issue has sparked debate – including on this blog – this post defends the Opinion as a constitutionally coherent and necessary step to safeguard the Union’s foundational values. It argues that AG Ćapeta’s approach is firmly rooted in existing case law and offers a compelling legal framework to address democratic backsliding. The post focuses on her use of the “good society” concept and the proposed “negation of values” test, examining their normative grounding and practical significance within EU law.
The recognition of animals and nature as potential rights holders has long been a controversial proposition within European legal discourse. However, we believe that the EU legal order is more hospitable to such recognition than one might expect. In a recent article, we argued for a rights-based reinterpretation of EU animal welfare and environmental protection laws. EU constitutional and secondary laws can be construed as entailing legal rights for non-human entities – even if these rights are not explicit the texts. We consider how the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and other EU legal acts may support a post-anthropocentric vision of Union law.
13. September 2025
Giovanni Capoccia
12. September 2025
Anne Peters
12. September 2025
Anne Peters