06 July 2016
Brexit and Art. 50: the Key lies in Luxembourg
A large British law firm has announced legal steps to ensure that the Art. 50 TEU procedure leading to EUV will be triggered by the British parliament. This might lead to a referral to the European Court of Justice. Continue reading >>
4 
05 July 2016
Political Reductionism at its Best: the EU Institutions’ Response to the Brexit Referendum
In their reaction to the Brexit referendum, some EU institutions have shown a troubling understanding of law – law as the mere crystallisation of power relationships, norms as just technicalities, annoying obstacles standing between the political actors and their legitimate goals. This is profoundly wrong and dangerous. Continue reading >>04 July 2016
Gute und schlechte Gründe: zur Annullierung der Stichwahl in Österreich
Der österreichische Verfassungsgerichtshof hatte einen guten und einen schlechten Grund, die Stichwahl des Bundespräsidenten zu annullieren. Die vorzeitige Veröffentlichung der Wahlergebnisse war ein guter Grund. Die formelle Verletzung der Vorschriften zur Briefwahl dagegen wäre eher ein Anlass gewesen, seine Rechtsprechung zum Wahlrecht endlich zu korrigieren. Dass er das nicht getan hat, bringt das ganze System ohne Not in Misskredit. Continue reading >>Everything you need to know about Article 50 (but were afraid to ask)
After the Brexit referendum, the new prime minister cannot dodge the fact that Article 50 is the only legal way for the UK to secede and that he or she, therefore, has a duty to pull the trigger. Not to deploy Article 50 would result in an even more disorderly situation than we have now. Article 50 it is. And if it were done, it were best done quickly. Continue reading >>Flucht aus der Grundrechtsbindung: „Flüchtlinge fressen“ und das ausländerrechtliche Beförderungsverbot
Die Kunstaktion "Flüchtlinge fressen" hat die Praxis, die Kontrolle der Einreise von Ausländern ohne Aufenthaltstitel den Fluggesellschaften aufzubürden, in den Fokus der öffentlichen Aufmerksamkeit zurückgeholt. Was wenige wissen: seit 1992 steht der höchstrichterliche Vorwurf im Raum, dass die Rechtsgrundlage dieser Praxis in ihrer derzeitigen Form/in ihrem Umfang verfassungswidrig ist. Bis heute ist dieser Vorwurf in Karlsruhe ungeklärt geblieben. Continue reading >>01 July 2016
A Lame Duck for a Member State? Thoughts on the UK’s Position in the EU after the Brexit Vote
Despite the fact that nothing has technically speaking happened in legal terms, the UK’s journey out of the European Union has already commenced and is starting to have tangible legal consequences. Continue reading >>30 June 2016
Keine Ratifikation des CETA ohne den Deutschen Bundestag – so oder so …
EU-Kommissionspräsident Juncker will das umstrittene CETA-Freihandelsabkommen in alleiniger Kompetenz der EU behandeln lassen. Vor allem in Deutschland fürchten viele, dass CETA damit einer legitimationsstiftenden Kontrolle des Bundestages entzogen würde. Doch wie steht es tatsächlich um den Einfluss des Bundestages? Nach meinem Dafürhalten ergeben sich für CETA nicht nur im Falle der Behandlung als gemischtes Abkommen, sondern auch im Falle der Behandlung als Abkommen in alleiniger EU-Kompetenz entscheidende Einwirkungsmöglichkeit des Bundestages. Continue reading >>A Citizens’ Attempt to Solve the Polish Constitutional Crisis
Polish civil society groups have drafted a bill regarding the Act on the Constitutional Tribunal, expecting that the governing party PiS does not intend to legally solve the severe constitutional crisis it has created. We document the speech the representative of these groups, Jaroslaw Marciniak, gave in the Sejm on June 9th 2016. Continue reading >>Populists chairing the European Commission and Parliament
No, the title of this post does not refer to a dystopia to come after the next European elections in 2019. It refers to the two presidents of today – Jean-Claude Juncker and Martin Schulz. Now why can they be seen as populists in some plausible way? In my view, this is because of the way in which they see politics and the role of the “people” in it. Continue reading >>
0
29 June 2016
Sovereign and misinformed: Brexit as an exercise in democracy?
Rather than criticising the Brexit referendum as a decision-making tool because ‘the people’ don’t have the necessary expertise to take decisions of this magnitude, we should question the conditions in which many UK voters were called to express their opinion. They, like many all over the world, have seen the progressive hollowing-out of those basic rights that make voting the expression of the right to individual and collective self-rule in the first place. Continue reading >>28 June 2016
England’s Difficulty; Scotland’s Opportunity
Rather than arguing over when and how Article 50 TEU might be activated and by whom, or whether the two year clock ticking for exit can be stopped once started, we need as responsible citizens in a democracy to face up in good faith to what many of us regard as an appalling result, and coalesce around pressing for the quickest possible conclusion of the least worst option which still respects the actual referendum result. Continue reading >>
0
United no more: Constitutional Headaches ahead for the United Kingdom
Those who voted Brexit are now celebrating and singing ‘Rule Britannia’ in the streets. They are still dreaming. When they will wake up, they will have to face the facts: there is no Empire, and Brexit will not solve their economic problems. Immigrants will not be deported, and if foreigners decide to leave, this will not solve their problems either. One day, they will wake up to discover that the Kingdom is dis-United. Continue reading >>
0
Scotland Can Veto Brexit (sort of …).
Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has announced that she would veto any attempt by a future British government to effect the withdrawal of the UK from the EU following the referendum result. This has raised a flurry of questioning of whether this is actually constitutionally permissible. In this blogpost I will argue why I think it is; that is that the Scottish Parliament does, constitutionally, have the power to use the constitution to attempt to veto an attempt by a British government to take the United Kingdom out of the European Union. Continue reading >>27 June 2016
Brexit im europäischen Verfassungsverbund
Wer jetzt auf den raschen Vollzug der „Entscheidung“ vom 23. Juni drängt, tut dies im besten Interesse der Stabilität und der Sicherheit. Wer dagegen Zeit gibt, zur Besinnung zu kommen und richtige Konsequenzen zu ziehen, könnte dem langfristigen Interesse Europas besser dienen. Continue reading >>A Disunited Kingdom: two Nations in, two Nations out
The United Kingdom is not a centralised state. It is a ‘family of nations’. There is a strong case for arguing that the referendum carries only if a majority of voters in all four nations respectively give their backing. England and Wales voted to leave, but Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain. Recognising that split is not a matter of shifting the goalposts after the fact. It is about respecting an established, indeed a compelling constitutional order. Continue reading >>
0
26 June 2016
Zwei Jahre sind nicht immer gleich zwei Jahre: wann beginnt der Brexit-Countdown?
Zwei Jahre gibt der EU-Vertrag einem austrittswilligen Land Zeit, mit der EU einen Austrittsvertrag auszuhandeln. Doch wann beginnt diese Frist? Und was, wenn das Land diesen Zeitpunkt mutwillig hinauszögert? Die Antwort lässt sich nicht allein formaljuristisch geben. Gefragt ist auch politische Klugheit. Continue reading >>A European Future for Scotland?
The fact that Scotland voted with 62% for the UK to remain a member of the EU whereas the majority of the overall UK electorate opted to leave the EU, raises important political and legal questions. Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has announced that a second referendum on Scottish independence is on the table. What are the options for a continued EU membership of an independent Scotland? Continue reading >>Five Questions on Brexit to LAURENT PECH
Middlesex Law Professor Laurent Pech on the limits if not perils of direct democracy when citizens to are asked to decide complex policy choices in the absence of a clear understanding of the available options and potential consequences of their vote. Continue reading >>25 June 2016
Five Questions on Brexit to NTINA TZOUVALA
Young international law scholar Ntina Tzouvala on the difference between the "will of the people" and a manouevre of the political elite, and on the danger for Europe to carry around a constitutional corpse. Continue reading >>
0
Five Questions on Brexit to KENNETH ARMSTRONG
... and five very succinct answers by Cambridge EU law professor Kenneth Armstrong, Continue reading >>
0