Successfully Articulating National Constitutional Identity Claims: Strait Is the Gate and Narrow Is the Way

IF 0.5 Q3 LAW European Public Law Pub Date : 2021-08-01 DOI:10.54648/euro2021027
François-Xavier Millet
{"title":"Successfully Articulating National Constitutional Identity Claims: Strait Is the Gate and Narrow Is the Way","authors":"François-Xavier Millet","doi":"10.54648/euro2021027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Article 4(2) Treaty of the European Union (TEU) has not played any autonomous role up to now. Cases involving that provision have not been handled differently by the Court than cases involving derogations to free movement. In this article, after an analysis of the existingcase law on Article 4(2) TEU, I make the case for a bolder and exceptional use of Article 4(2) TEU where genuine national constitutional identity claims (NCI claims) directly clash with provisions of EU law. I provide a normative framework of analysis to identify genuine NCI claims and determine how the Court should address them. ‘Strait is the gate and narrow is the way’ is certainly a relevant metaphor to capture the possibility for genuine NCI claims to be successful. In view of its own mission and constraints, the Court is only to accept well motivated, narrow claims that are strictly based on crucial and distinctive features of national law that are embedded in the national Constitution and do not run against the own constitutional identity of the Union.\nMember State constitutional identity, Article 4(2) TEU, Extraordinary function, Constitutional conflicts, Instructions for use, Constitutional courts, Court of Justice, Balancing between national identity and fundamental rights, European Union constitutional identity, National and European constitutionalism","PeriodicalId":43955,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Public Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2021027","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: 2

Abstract

Article 4(2) Treaty of the European Union (TEU) has not played any autonomous role up to now. Cases involving that provision have not been handled differently by the Court than cases involving derogations to free movement. In this article, after an analysis of the existingcase law on Article 4(2) TEU, I make the case for a bolder and exceptional use of Article 4(2) TEU where genuine national constitutional identity claims (NCI claims) directly clash with provisions of EU law. I provide a normative framework of analysis to identify genuine NCI claims and determine how the Court should address them. ‘Strait is the gate and narrow is the way’ is certainly a relevant metaphor to capture the possibility for genuine NCI claims to be successful. In view of its own mission and constraints, the Court is only to accept well motivated, narrow claims that are strictly based on crucial and distinctive features of national law that are embedded in the national Constitution and do not run against the own constitutional identity of the Union. Member State constitutional identity, Article 4(2) TEU, Extraordinary function, Constitutional conflicts, Instructions for use, Constitutional courts, Court of Justice, Balancing between national identity and fundamental rights, European Union constitutional identity, National and European constitutionalism
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
成功阐明国家宪法身份主张:海峡是门,狭窄是路
《欧洲联盟条约》第4条第2款至今未发挥任何自主作用。法院对涉及该条款的案件的处理与涉及减损自由行动的案件并无不同。在这篇文章中,在分析了现有的关于第4(2)条TEU的基本法律后,我提出了在真正的国家宪法身份主张(NCI主张)与欧盟法律条款直接冲突的情况下,更大胆和例外地使用第4(1)条的理由。我提供了一个规范的分析框架,以确定真正的NCI索赔,并确定法院应如何处理这些索赔。”海峡是门,狭窄是路”无疑是一个相关的比喻,以捕捉NCI真正声称成功的可能性。鉴于其自身的使命和限制,法院只能接受动机充分、狭隘的主张,这些主张严格基于国家宪法中嵌入的国家法律的关键和独特特征,不违背联邦自身的宪法身份,使用说明、宪法法院、法院、国家身份和基本权利之间的平衡、欧盟宪法身份、国家和欧洲宪政
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