Read more
Combining constitutional and political theory with an in-depth case study of the German Constitutional Court, de Boer argues that national courts' review of European law can constrain democratic debate and risks taking sides in good faith political disagreements among elected legislators about constitutional questions relating to the EU.
List of contents
- Table of Cases
- Table of Legislation
- List of Abbreviations
- 1: Introduction
- 2: Judicial Review and Democratic Legitimacy
- 3: National Constitutional Courts' Review of European Law and its Democratic Legitimacy
- 4: The Rise of Judicial Euroscepticism: Maastricht
- 5: The Euro Crisis and the Judicialization of Euro-Politics
- 6: Court-Ordered Parliamentary Oversight and the Euro Crisis
- 7: The PSPP Ruling and the Pandemic: A Move to Weak Review?
- 8: Conclusion
- List of Interviews
- Bibliography
- Index
About the author
Nik de Boer is Assistant Professor of constitutional law at the University of Amsterdam and a member of the editorial board of the European Constitutional Law Review. He received a PhD from the University of Amsterdam and has held visiting positions at the European Court of Justice, Harvard Law School, and at the Center for Global Constitutionalism of the Berlin Social Science Centre (WZB). Previously, he was a Postdoctoral Researcher at the Amsterdam Centre for Contemporary European Studies (ACCESS EUROPE) and an Assistant Professor of financial law at the University of Amsterdam.
Summary
Combining constitutional and political theory with an in-depth case study of the German Constitutional Court, de Boer argues that national courts' review of European law can constrain democratic debate and risks taking sides in good faith political disagreements among elected legislators about constitutional questions relating to the EU.
Additional text
Judging European Democracy provides a unique combination of a thorough analysis in constitutional and political theory, discussing ongoing debates on the legitimacy of constitutional review, and an in-depth analysis of constitutional debates on EU matters in Germany. The case study of the German Constitutional Court helps to test various theoretical claims against concrete constitutional and political practice. In this way, Judging European Democracy contributes both to the theoretical debate concerning constitutional review-in general and in the context of the EU-as well as to the debate concerning constitutional practice in the EU and possible institutional reform.
