Thema: Grundrechte

Verfassungsrechtlicher Grundrechtsschutz in nationalen Rechtssystemen, einschließlich Freiheitsrechte, Verfahrensrechte und soziale Rechte im Rahmen nationaler Verfassungsordnungen. Umfasst die Verfassungsrechtsprechung zu individuellen Freiheiten, rechtsstaatlichen Garantien und sozioökonomischen Rechten, wie sie von nationalen Verfassungsgerichten geschützt werden.

Gerichte als Spielball von Symbolpolitik

Seit Tagen polarisiert die Entscheidung des VG Berlin zur Zurückweisung dreier somalischer Asylsuchender an der deutschen Grenze durch die Bundespolizei. Bundesinnenminister Alexander Dobrindt erklärte unmittelbar nach Verkündung der Entscheidung, dass sie ihn nicht daran hindere, an der eingeführten Praxis festzuhalten. Auch wenn sie sich von exekutivem Ungehorsam unterscheidet, ist die Reduzierung der Entscheidung auf ihre Einzelfallwirkung ein Falltypus der Missachtung von Gerichtsentscheidungen.

16. Juni 2025

, , , , ,

Whose Values?

&

Value-based reasoning features prominently in CJEU case law, most recently in AG Ćapeta’s opinion in Commission v. Hungary. However, what is treated as absolute within the Union turns flexible and conditional in cases concerning asylum, integration, as well as anti-discrimination. A closer look at the “feminist” cases (WS, K and L, and AH and FN) reveals how “Western values”-centred reasoning is deployed at the Member State level and re-elaborated by the CJEU as the fundamental value of gender equality – opening the door to ideological reinterpretations.

16. Juni 2025

, , , ,

Troops in L.A.

This past weekend, President Donald Trump issued a presidential memorandum that federalized National Guard troops and deployed those troops alongside active-duty marines in response to protests against his aggressive immigration enforcement operations in Los Angeles. While framed as a response to violence, the order also addresses peaceful protest. The decision to send military forces against civilians engaged in protected First Amendment activity marks a dangerous escalation, raising serious legal and constitutional concerns.

13. Juni 2025

, , , , ,

Parlamentarische Frage vs. Schutz vor Rassismus

&

Parlamentarische Anfragen nach den Vornamen deutscher Tatverdächtiger haben eine unrühmliche Geschichte. 2024 verweigerte der Berliner Senat erstmals die Auskunft, weil er das Recht auf informationelle Selbstbestimmung verletzt sah. Der Berliner Verfassungsgerichtshof hat diese Argumentation nun zurückgewiesen und die Antwortverweigerung als Verstoß gegen Abgeordnetenrechte gewertet – ohne dabei den Rassismus solcher Anfragen zu thematisieren. Dagegen weist das Minderheitenvotum zu Recht darauf hin, dass Diskriminierungsverbote eine verfassungsimmanente Grenze parlamentarischer Informationsrechte bilden.

13. Juni 2025

, , , , , , , , ,

Somewhere Over The Rainbow

On 5 June 2025, Advocate General Ćapeta issued her Opinion in Commission v. Hungary, a landmark ECJ case on Hungary’s “anti-LGBTIQ” law. While the law is overtly discriminatory, the Commission framed its case around internal market rules, Charter rights, and Article 2 TEU values. While this might seem curious, I argue this reflects a strategic “camouflaging” of non-discrimination claims to better protect LGBTIQ rights within the limits of current EU anti-discrimination and equality law.

11. Juni 2025

, , , , , ,

Behind Bars, Beyond Rights

The European Court of Human Rights has quietly endorsed a troubling new practice: denying prisoners access to information based solely on format, not content. In Tergek v. Türkiye, the Court upheld a ban on photocopies and printouts, deferring to vague security concerns. Read alongside Yasak, the judgment signals a broader shift away from rigorous rights protection toward deference to state narratives. If this trend continues, the Convention's core promise — to make rights practical and effective — stands on increasingly shaky ground.

5. Juni 2025

, ,

The Questionable Concept of Protective Weapons

On 20 May 2025, the European Court of Human Rights handed down a landmark ruling in Russ v. Germany, finding that penalising a protester for wearing a makeshift visor breached his freedom of assembly. With its clear rejection of the German courts’ blanket approach, Strasbourg echoes long-standing constitutional concerns in German legal scholarship over the criminalisation of defensive gear at protests. Beyond Germany, the judgment affirms the Court’s role in shielding democratic participation across Europe.

3. Juni 2025

,

Trump’s Threat to Nonprofits

The administration of President Trump is threatening nonprofits with the loss of tax-exempt status in an attempt to force them to conform their activities to policies favored by that administration. The threats are based on shaky legal grounds, and nonprofits have both constitutional and statutory bases for countering them. Nevertheless, these threats are significant, especially when combined with the administration’s efforts to cut government funding for many programs operated by nonprofits. And at the same time, the U.S. Congress is considering reducing the benefits of tax-exempt status in many ways, primarily to help pay for tax cuts benefitting wealthy individuals and corporations.

3. Juni 2025

, , , ,

Challenging Safe Access

Safe Access Zones (SAZ) in Great Britain, in force since autumn 2024, establish protective areas around abortion service providers and criminalise specific behaviours within these zones. However, ongoing anti-abortion protests raise questions about the practical enforceability of the new laws. This article examines whether SAZ laws can withstand these challenges and argues that they succeed in striking a fair balance between the rights of anti-abortion demonstrators and pregnant persons seeking access to lawful abortion services under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

27. Mai 2025

, , , ,