What is Citizenship For?

Last week, the CJEU declared Malta’s citizenship for investment scheme incompatible with EU law. Setting aside the evidently highly questionable quality and defensibility of the Court’s legal reasoning, the decision clearly casts Union citizenship as a status constituted by meanings and norms specific to the European Union as a normative legal project. What are we to make of this conception of citizenship, and its use by the Court to strike down citizenship for investment schemes?

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.

The EU Free Market Does Not Extend to Citizenship

In the landmark Commission v Malta judgment of 29 April 2025, the European Union Court of Justice outlawed the “commercialisation” of EU citizenship, closing a door for corrupt actors. The Grand Chamber judgment not only bars the Maltese practice at issue, but also casts doubt on the legality of citizenship grants under that and similar schemes, while raising legal arguments for would-be citizens to challenge discriminatory laws.

Criminalising the Legal Profession

Lawyers and bar associations in Turkey have long faced political and legal pressure. The court case against the Istanbul Bar Association that led to the dismissal of its executive board and the criminal prosecution of board members is another troubling instance of such pressure. The case exemplifies how authoritarian regimes increasingly criminalise lawyers and professional organisations that speak out against rights violations.

Fashion Upcycling and the Human Right to a Healthy Environment

With new collections each season, the fashion industry produces a highly problematic fashion garbage heap every year. Circular economy projects seeking to produce “new” garments by reworking second hand and unsold fashion items have particular societal value against this background. Evidently, legal solutions that support fashion reuse have particular relevance in the light of these goals.

Fast Fashion, Slow Transition

In the new ultra-fast fashion era, garment production cycles are accelerated to new heights, while the quality of the garments deteriorates. Key characteristics of the industry are its reliance on cheap manufacturing, overconsumption and short-lived garment use. This blog post will set out who is responsible for the protection of human rights from climate change within the textile industry. In a second step, this blog post aims to analyse the EU Strategy, focusing on the intersection between environmental and social rights in the textile industry.

The Human Right to a Healthy Environment from an EU Charter Perspective

Over the last five years, there has been a noticeable turn towards human rights in climate litigation. In the same period, European climate legislation has evolved into a considerable legal framework. This warrants the question of whether there has been a similar turn to human rights before the Court of Justice of the EU – especially as Article 37 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights consecrates the “principle” of environmental protection.

The Executive’s Responsibility for the Constitution

Who is responsible for safeguarding the constitution? Traditionally, constitutional lawyers have focused on the courts. But the alarming actions of Trump 2.0 and democratic backsliding across the world suggests we should think far more about the role of the executive. The UK House of Lords Constitution Committee (“the Committee”) has recently published a report on Executive oversight and responsibility for the UK constitution, which emphasizes institutions, in particular the civil service, as a solution the threats to constitutional governance posed but the executive. But this may be wishful thinking.

Weniger Spielraum als behauptet

Im Januar 2025 versuchte die CDU/CSU-Fraktion mit Stimmen der AfD, FDP und BSW, ihr sogenanntes „Zustrombegrenzungsgesetz“ zu beschließen. Der Gesetzentwurf sah unter anderem vor, den Familiennachzug zu subsidiär Schutzberechtigten vollständig und unbefristet auszusetzen. Zwar scheiterte das Vorhaben, doch nun planen CDU/CSU und SPD laut Sondierungspapier den Familiennachzug zu subsidiär Schutzberechtigten befristet auszusetzen. Wer eine erneute Aussetzung als rechtlich haltbare und politisch sinnvolle Maßnahme darstellt, verkennt die tatsächliche Lage der Betroffenen und ignoriert, dass Visa ohnehin regelmäßig nach § 22 Satz 1 AufenthG zu erteilen wären.

Everything Comes at a Price

The sale of Union citizenship, which is at the heart of the case against Malta currently pending before the ECJ, has been the subject of feverish writing. With the Court’s judgment nearing, this short blogpost will, however, not opine on what the judgment should be. Instead, it considers the potential effects of a judgment that endorses the (ill-conceived) Opinion of AG Collins that Malta’s nationality by investment scheme does not conflict with EU law.