Deutsch
 
Hilfe Datenschutzhinweis Impressum
  DetailsucheBrowse

Datensatz

DATENSATZ AKTIONENEXPORT
  Proportionality in the PSPP Saga: Why Constitutional Pluralism Is Here to Stay and Why the Federal Constitutional Court Did not Violate the Rules of Loyal Conduct

Höpner, M. (2021). Proportionality in the PSPP Saga: Why Constitutional Pluralism Is Here to Stay and Why the Federal Constitutional Court Did not Violate the Rules of Loyal Conduct. European Papers, 6(3), 1527-1551. doi:10.15166/2499-8249/537.

Item is

Basisdaten

einblenden: ausblenden:
Genre: Zeitschriftenartikel

Dateien

einblenden: Dateien
ausblenden: Dateien
:
EP_6_2022_Höpner.pdf (beliebiger Volltext), 407KB
Name:
EP_6_2022_Höpner.pdf
Beschreibung:
Full text open access
OA-Status:
Sichtbarkeit:
Öffentlich
MIME-Typ / Prüfsumme:
application/pdf / [MD5]
Technische Metadaten:
Copyright Datum:
-
Copyright Info:
-
Lizenz:
-

Externe Referenzen

einblenden:
ausblenden:
externe Referenz:
https://doi.org/10.15166/2499-8249/537 (Verlagsversion)
Beschreibung:
Full text open access via publisher
OA-Status:

Urheber

einblenden:
ausblenden:
 Urheber:
Höpner, Martin1, Autor           
Affiliations:
1Politische Ökonomie der europäischen Integration, MPI for the Study of Societies, Max Planck Society, ou_1856345              

Inhalt

einblenden:
ausblenden:
Schlagwörter: constitutional pluralism – supremacy – proportionality – European Central Bank – PSPP – Weiss
 Zusammenfassung: In May 2020, for the first time in its history, the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) of Germany declared Union acts as being ultra vires. According to the FCC, the European Central Bank (ECB) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) had acted beyond their mandates because they did not apply strong proportionality standards to the ECB’s Public Sector Purchase Programme (PSPP). The resulting stalemate within constitutional pluralism has revived the discussions about loyalism within constitutional pluralism and about the possible introduction of an appeal court with the “final say” over constitutional conflict. This Article shows that, contrary to the assessment of some critics, the controversial ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court was within the bounds of loyal behavior within constitutional pluralism. As the analysis of the PSPP conflict also shows, a European super-judicial authority would reach its limits the more we move from the surface to the core of the struggles between European and national constitutional law. The different readings of proportionality are difficult to bridge, and the mutually exclusive claims about the nature of the supremacy of European law are not accessible to compromise at all. We should therefore not expect too much from an appeal court, if it were introduced.

Details

einblenden:
ausblenden:
Sprache(n): eng - English
 Datum: 2022-03-152021
 Publikationsstatus: Erschienen
 Seiten: -
 Ort, Verlag, Ausgabe: -
 Inhaltsverzeichnis: I. Introduction: when European and constitutional law collide.
II. Constitutional pluralism and the idea of an appeal court.
III. From Karlsruhe to Luxembourg and back: OMT and PSPP.
IV. The many faces of proportionality.
V. Proportionality in the PSPP decision of the FCC.
VI. Discussion.
VII. Conclusion: a way out of constitutional pluralism?
 Art der Begutachtung: Expertenbegutachtung
 Identifikatoren: DOI: 10.15166/2499-8249/537
 Art des Abschluß: -

Veranstaltung

einblenden:

Entscheidung

einblenden:

Projektinformation

einblenden:

Quelle 1

einblenden:
ausblenden:
Titel: European Papers
Genre der Quelle: Zeitschrift
 Urheber:
Affiliations:
Ort, Verlag, Ausgabe: -
Seiten: - Band / Heft: 6 (3) Artikelnummer: - Start- / Endseite: 1527 - 1551 Identifikator: ISSN: 2499-8249