The Fog of Identity and Judicial Contestation: Preventive and Defensive Constitutional Identity Review in Germany

IF 0.5 Q3 LAW European Public Law Pub Date : 2021-08-01 DOI:10.54648/euro2021022
M. Wendel
{"title":"The Fog of Identity and Judicial Contestation: Preventive and Defensive Constitutional Identity Review in Germany","authors":"M. Wendel","doi":"10.54648/euro2021022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article deals with constitutional identity review by the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC). While identity review is often discussed merely as an instrument of judicial contestation by which the FCC challenges the European Court of Justice and its stance on the primacy of EU law, this article shows that both the aim and the effect of identity review go far beyond judicial conflict. In fact, identity review produces significant preventive and deterrent effects on (national) EU policies, which come into play well before any judicial conflict. By means of preventive identity review, the FCC has created a fog of identity, a dark field of potential unconstitutionality, which considerably limits the scope of policy choices in advance and even irrespective of whether or not these policies would ultimately be judged to be unconstitutional. As for the defensive dimension of identity review, the article addresses the complexity of the (too often simplified) conceptual relationship of identity review to other modes of review such as ultra vires review and the Solange case law. It shows that identity review has gradually become the conceptual heart of the FCC’s defensive triad.\nIdentity review, constitutional identity, fog of identity, German Federal Constitutional Court, preventive and defensive identity review, eternity clause, principle of democracy, NGEU, European Arrest Warrant III, PSPP, Unified Patent Court, Right to be forgotten I and II, Banking Union, Egenberger","PeriodicalId":43955,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Public Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2021022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article deals with constitutional identity review by the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC). While identity review is often discussed merely as an instrument of judicial contestation by which the FCC challenges the European Court of Justice and its stance on the primacy of EU law, this article shows that both the aim and the effect of identity review go far beyond judicial conflict. In fact, identity review produces significant preventive and deterrent effects on (national) EU policies, which come into play well before any judicial conflict. By means of preventive identity review, the FCC has created a fog of identity, a dark field of potential unconstitutionality, which considerably limits the scope of policy choices in advance and even irrespective of whether or not these policies would ultimately be judged to be unconstitutional. As for the defensive dimension of identity review, the article addresses the complexity of the (too often simplified) conceptual relationship of identity review to other modes of review such as ultra vires review and the Solange case law. It shows that identity review has gradually become the conceptual heart of the FCC’s defensive triad. Identity review, constitutional identity, fog of identity, German Federal Constitutional Court, preventive and defensive identity review, eternity clause, principle of democracy, NGEU, European Arrest Warrant III, PSPP, Unified Patent Court, Right to be forgotten I and II, Banking Union, Egenberger
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
身份迷雾与司法争议——德国预防性与防御性宪法身份审查
本文论述了德国联邦宪法法院对宪法身份的审查。虽然身份审查通常只是作为一种司法争议工具来讨论,联邦通信委员会通过这种工具来挑战欧洲法院及其对欧盟法律首要地位的立场,但本文表明,身份审查的目的和效果远远超出了司法冲突。事实上,身份审查对(国家)欧盟政策产生了重大的预防和威慑作用,这些政策早在任何司法冲突之前就开始发挥作用。通过预防性身份审查,联邦通信委员会制造了一个身份迷雾,一个潜在违宪的黑暗领域,这大大限制了提前选择政策的范围,甚至无论这些政策最终是否会被判定为违宪。关于身份审查的防御层面,文章论述了身份审查与其他审查模式(如越权审查和索兰奇判例法)的概念关系的复杂性(过于简化)。这表明,身份审查已逐渐成为联邦通信委员会防御三合会的概念核心。身份审查,宪法身份,身份之雾,德国联邦宪法法院,预防性和防御性身份审查,永恒条款,民主原则,NGEU,欧洲逮捕令III,PSPP,联合专利法院,被遗忘权I和II,银行联盟,埃根伯格
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
16.70%
发文量
9
期刊最新文献
‘Respect for Religious Feelings’: As the Italian Case Shows, Fresh Paint Can’t Fix the Crumbling Wall of Blasphemy The ‘Then’ and the ‘Now’ of Forced Relocation of Indigenous Peoples: Repercussions in International Law, Torts and Beyond Subsidiarity v. Autonomy in the EU Book Review: Federalism and Constitutional Law: The Italian Contribution to Comparative Regionalism, Erika Arban, Giuseppe Martinico & Francesco Palermo (eds). London and New York: Routledge. 2021 The Tragic Choices During the Global Health Emergency: Comparative Economic Law Reflections
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1