Backlash against the Court of Justice of the EU? The Recent Jurisprudence of the German Constitutional Court on EU Fundamental Rights as a Standard of Review

Abstract

This article discusses two landmark judgements by the German Federal Constitutional Court (CC) on the relationship between domestic and EU fundamental rights protection (Right to be forgotten I and II). In these judgements, for the first time, the CC uses EU fundamental rights as a standard of review. In addition, the CC establishes a novel framework of “parallel applicability” of EU and domestic fundamental rights for subject matters that are not fully harmonized by EU law. The article first presents the new approach, showing that it structurally changes the parameters of the relationship between the CC and the CJEU. Second, the article assesses the legal-political tendency reflected in this change: is this constructive dialogue or rather pushback against the CJEU? The article argues that this new jurisprudence should be characterized as an instance of resistance. The CC resists against the CJEU in its function as fundamental rights court, attempting to reduce the authority of the CJEU and reversing a development that it considered to be unfavourable to its own authority. This is structural pushback aimed at the CJEU’s function rather than at individual decisions or norms - however, without rejection the CJEU as an institution altogether.

Legal Policy of Constitutional Complaints in Judicial Review: A Comparison of Germany, Austria, Hungary, and Indonesia

“…It has even defined the positive counter-model to the United States Supreme Court, 56 confrontational with European Union (EU) law, 57 and the most advanced and established constitutional court system. It is a strong judicial actor at the national and European levels, and several decisions made EU law into a benchmark 58 or set aside 59 the role of the CJEU in protecting European human rights level. 60 President of GFCC 2010-2020 Andreas Voßkuhle opinion that the GFCC is a mediator between the German Basic Law and the European legal system.…”

The End of History in EU Law and Politics? Challenging Founding Narratives with a New Research Agenda

“…For example, the Supreme Court of Denmark explicitly defied the CJEU's caselaw in the 2016 Ajos case, highlighting "institutional frictions which have been building for some time, and [providing] an example of irreconcilable judicial perceptions of the relationship between national and EU law" (Madsen et al 2017, 141). The German Constitutional Court has long had a testy relationship with the CJEU and often resists its rulings when they impinge on fundamental rights or the democratic process, including in its 2020 Weiss decision (e.g., Burchardt 2020;Lohse 2015). The Czech Constitutional Court declared the CJEU's judgment in the 2012 Landtova case ultra vries, stating that the CJEU "had overstepped the boundaries of the powers transferred to the European Union by the Czech Republic" (Dyevre 2016, 107).…”

Pile of Law: Learning Responsible Data Filtering from the Law and a 256GB Open-Source Legal Dataset

“…Canada allows most criminal records to be expunged after a period of good behavior. And in Germany, virtually all criminal records are automatically sealed after a set time, and courts have even imposed fines for publicizing a person's criminal history after expungement [22].…”