Thema: Demokratie & Institutionen

Verfassungsrechtliche Rahmenbedingungen für demokratische Regierungsführung, Gewaltenteilung, institutionelles Design und demokratische Prozesse. Umfasst die verfassungsrechtlichen Strukturen für Legislative, Exekutive und Judikative, Wahlsysteme, Föderalismus und verfassungsrechtliche Mechanismen demokratischer Rechenschaftspflicht.

Gemeinsam aus der Ultra-vires-Falle

Das PSPP-Urteil des BVerfG sollte Anlass sein, über die künftige Gestalt der europäischen Gerichtsverfassung nachzudenken. So verständlich manche Reaktionen auf beiden Seiten des Konflikts auch sein mögen, sie führen nicht weiter. Weder die teils überzogene Kritik in den Medien am BVerfG noch der haltlose Verdacht gegen den EuGH, er wolle den europäischen Bundesstaat per Urteil herbeizwingen, bieten eine zukunftsweisende Lösung. Ein Gemeinsamer Rat der obersten Gerichtshöfe der Europäischen Union könnte diese Aufgabe übernehmen. Hierfür müssten zwar die Gründungsverträge geändert werden. Jedoch sollte uns die Sicherung des Rechtsfriedens in der EU diesen Versuch wert sein.

4. Juni 2020

, , ,

In Praise of Uncertainty

The Bundesverfassungsgericht's PSPP decision will have immense consequences. I have no reason to doubt the alarm raised by so many informed and respected commentators. But here’s one small thing that has been lost in the debate so far. The Court’s decision to go its own way on a question of European law might be seen as evidence of the influence of the common law tradition in the European legal system. That’s no bad thing, and it’s probably unavoidable in any case.

4. Juni 2020

, , , ,

The Faceless Court

The authority of the European Court of Justice (ECJ), the veritable Supreme Court of the European Union, has come under attack. In May 2020, the German Constitutional Court challenged the authority of the ECJ by holding that the Luxembourg court had acted beyond its mandate by allowing the quantitative easing measures issued by the European Central Bank. While many remain fixated on how the German decision has triggered the EU constitutional crisis, the public may have overlooked a more fundamental problem that has long beset the legitimacy of the ECJ—its own institutional failures.

3. Juni 2020

, , , ,

The EU Judiciary After Weiss

The damage to the integrity of the EU’s legal order and its rule of law is done, and the toothpaste cannot be pushed back into the tube. So the pressing questions now are two: How to address and mitigate the damage, and how to prevent its repetition. We propose that in the Conference on the Future of Europe serious consideration be given to the establishment of a new appeal jurisdiction within the Court of Justice, strictly and narrowly confined to Weiss type cases, where at issue is the delineation of the jurisdictional line between the Member States and their EU.

2. Juni 2020

, , ,

Trump vs. Twitter

Donald Trump is among the world’s most famous and prolific Twitter brawlers, picking fights — while the sitting President of the United States — with, among others, Greta Thunberg, supermodel Chrissy Teigen, and his former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. Now he finds himself in a fight with Twitter itself, and he is bringing the power of his high office to bear. After Twitter began flagging tweets from the President under a new fact-checking policy, Trump issued an Executive Order (EO) that threatens actions against platforms engaged in “Online Censorship.” The legal effects of the President’s action are likely to be limited. The broader political effects are harder to gauge.

30. Mai 2020

, , ,

Unquestioned supremacy still begs the question

Earlier this week, 32 leading scholars of EU law and politics signed the statement that national courts cannot override CJEU judgments, in response to a demonstration by the BVerfG that it actually can. We share the signatories’ concern that Weiss might (and most probably will) be used as a pretext for refusing to comply with the CJEU’s rulings and the EU rule of law requirements in Member States such as Poland or Hungary. We are also critical of the conclusion to which the BVerfG arrived in its decision, though we accept some of its premises (i.e., that the national disapplication of EU acts may be justified in some rare and exceptional cases). However, even though we are not all constitutional pluralists, we take issue with some aspects of the reasoning behind the original statement and question the doctrinal and empirical arguments it invokes in favour of EU law’s unconditional supremacy.

29. Mai 2020

, , ,

Amtsautorität: Der wunde Punkt der Chancengleichheit

Die „Amtsautorität“ ist ein schillernder Begriff, der eigentlich besser zur Obrigkeitshörigkeit im wilhelminischen Kaiserreich passt als in die heutige Zeit. Dennoch stellt die Frage nach der „Nutzung von Amtsautorität“ einen festen Bestandteil der Rechtsprechung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts dar, wenn es um die Reglementierung der Neutralitätspflicht der Amtsträger zugunsten der Chancengleichheit der Parteien geht. Dass dies auch in der anstehenden Seehofer-Entscheidung so sein wird, bietet Anlass, die schwierige Rolle der Amtsautorität in der Äußerungsrechtsprechung des BVerfG zu reflektieren.

28. Mai 2020

, ,

A Motion of No Confidence and Political Power Struggles Amidst a Pandemic

Only in office since the beginning of February, Kosovo’s Prime Minister Albin Kurti did not survive a motion of no confidence in late March. Instead of calling new elections, the President of the Republic has been working towards forming a new government, invoking his right to propose a Prime Minister. This move, however, has no basis in the constitution, and the Constitutional Court is expected to clarify the matter any day.

28. Mai 2020

, , ,

Corona Constitutional #29: Bundesbank in der Zwickmühle

Über das EZB-Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichts haben wir schon viel gestritten. Aber wie genau soll es jetzt weiter gehen? Um das herauszufinden, hat der Bundestag gestern eine Gruppe Sachverständiger eingeladen. Einer von ihnen war CHRISTIAN WALTER, Professor an der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München. Mit ihm spricht Max Steinbeis in der heutigen Podcastfolge über die komplizierten Folgen des umstrittenen Urteils.

26. Mai 2020

, ,