Refine
Document Type
- Article (14)
- Part of a Book (12)
- Book (1)
- Editorship book (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Language
- English (29)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (29) (remove)
Keywords
- Academic discourse (1)
- Charles Sabel (1)
- Constitutional Dialogue (1)
- Constitutional balance (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- EU Competence (1)
- EU Economic Governance (1)
- EU constitutionalism (1)
- EU institutions (1)
- EU law (1)
How should decision-making under EU economic governance be understood following the euro-crisis? This article argues, contra existing depictions, that the post-crisis EU has increasingly adopted methods of decision-making in the economic field which marry the decision-making structure of inter-governmentalism with the supervisory and implementation framework of the Community Method. While this ‘post-crisis’ method has arisen for clear reasons – to achieve economic convergence between eurozone states in an environment where previous models of decision-making were unsuitable or unwanted – it also carries important normative implications. Post-crisis governance departs from the mechanisms of legal and political accountability present in previous forms of EU decision-making without substituting new models of accountability in their place. Providing appropriate channels of political and legal control in the EU's ‘new’ economic governance should be seen as a crucial task for the coming decade.
How does the European Court Reason? A Review Essay on the Legal Reasoning of the Court of Justice
(2014)
This review essay analyses two significant recent contributions to the debate over the reasoning of the Court of Justice (CJ). These contributions highlight the impossibility of a wholly scientific and deductive approach to attributing ‘correct’ outcomes to the Court's case-law. At the same time, their analysis adds significant findings for the debate over the Court's possible ‘activist’ or political role. Following from these contributions, this essay makes two arguments: firstly, that the inability of the Court to anchor its reasoning solely in a deductive form of legal reasoning should encourage the CJ to engage in a more advanced ‘constitutional dialogue’ with the EU's political institutions; and secondly, that truly understanding the Court's reasoning involves a closer analysis of the institutional and personal dynamics influencing Court decisions. Understanding European judicial reasoning may require a closer look at the social and political—as well as doctrinal—context within which European judges act.