National Identity and Judicial Minimalism: Exploring The Cjeu’s Restraint in Adjudicating National Identity

Author:

Burda Jan1

Affiliation:

1. Faculty of Law , Masaryk University , Czech Republic

Abstract

Summary Even thought the Court of Justice of the EU has already decided a number of cases dealing with national identity, judicial clarification of the concept is still missing. On the contrary, the reasoning employed in the Court’s case-law leaves a lot to be desired. This article explores the reasons that lead the Court to underarticulating its decisions in identity cases. I argue that the Court’s minimalism in adjudicating national identity is rooted not only in reasons driving the Court’s general minimalist approach, but also in considerations specific to identity cases. These reasons include the national identity’s inherent potential to hinder European integration, the sensitivity of determining the content of Member States’ national identities by a supranational court, the attempts to obscure the Court’s receptivity of identity arguments, and the potential to widen the applicability of its identity rulings.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

Law

Reference32 articles.

1. MALFITANO, Chiara; POLLICINO, Oreste. Two Courts, two Languages? The Taricco Saga Ends on a Worrying Note. Verfassungsblog, 5 June 2018. Available at: https://verfassungsblog.de/two-courts-two-languages-the-taricco-saga-ends-on-a-worrying-note/

2. BECK, Gunnar. The Legal Reasoning of the Court of Justice of the EU. Hart Publishing, 2012.

3. BOBEK, Michal. Why There is no Principle of ‘Procedural Autonomy’ of the Member States. In: MICKLITZ, Hans-Wolfgang; DE WITTE, Bruno (eds.). The European Court of Justice and Autonomy of the Member States, 2011, Intersentia.

4. BONELLI, Mateo. The Taricco saga and the consolidation of judicial dialogue in the European Union: CJEU, C-105/14 Ivo Taricco and others, ECLI:EU:C:2015:555; and C-42/17 M.A.S., M.B., ECLI:EU:C:2017:936 Italian Constitutional Court, Order no. 24/2017. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 2018, Vol. 25(3), pp. 357–373.10.1177/1023263X18773046

5. DE BÚRCA, Gráinne. After the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: The Court of Justice as a Human Rights Adjudicator? Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 2013, Vol. 20.10.1177/1023263X1302000202

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3