7 ms·

Is the ECJ kind of a Supreme Court that can overturn member state laws and rulings? I had the impression member states were 100% sovereign within the EU...

sofixa 4y ago
> I had the impression member states were 100% sovereign within the EU... ~80-90% depending on how you measure. The judiciary of all countries is technically under the ECJ jurisdiction. People can sue their countries, and local court decisions can be appealed to the European court structure (ECJ/ECHR). That was in fact one of the Brexit talking points, judiciary independence.
- ectopod 4y ago
  Just to be clear, the ECHR is not an EU court and brexit Britain is still under its jurisdiction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_R...
  - M2Ys4U 4y ago
    And one cannot appeal a case from the court of a member state to the CJEU. Member states' courts can (in some cases must) refer specific questions of law, but that is not an appeal by any party to the dispute.
dagw 4y ago
ECJ can only rule on EU laws. So as such they are not overturning any German laws, just stating the the German law is not in compliance with EU regulations. What that means in practice varies a lot from case to case, but in general the EU has the power to fine members that are in breach of EU regulations. For practical reasons most EU countries want to be in compliance with EU law and will often follow ECJ recommendations and change their own laws if found to not be compliant. Also many EU countries have laws that essentially state that all their laws must comply with EU law. The other option is to apply for an explicit opt out of certain a EU regulation that you feel is incompatible with your own laws.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > many EU countries have laws that essentially state that all their laws must comply with EU law Isn’t granting the ECJ jurisdiction is a requirement of EU membership?
  - Longhanks 4y ago
    EU treaties are not a constitution and the constitution the people gives itself stands above all.
    - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
      > EU treaties are not a constitution and the constitution the people gives itself stands above all Germany [1] and Hungary [2] played with this fire. In summary, no. Treaties have force of law. If a country improperly ratified their EU treaties, they need to amend their constitution (if it exists) or admit they never properly joined the EU in the first place. Given the latter means economic collapse for most EU members, it’s not a hard choice. [1] https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2020/06/nick-kenny-german-constitutional-court-eu/ https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2020/06/nick-kenny-german-... [2] https://www.reuters.com/world/first-eu-seen-moving-cut-money-hungary-over-damaging-democracy-2022-09-18/ https://www.reuters.com/world/first-eu-seen-moving-cut-money...
      - Longhanks 4y ago
        Once the people choose to no longer follow the EU Supreme Court, thus, as a follow up, no longer choose to follow the EU treaties, they exit the EU just as the UK did. No country is or can be forced to be a EU member. Just because there are economic implications does not mean the EU treaties are above the countries‘ constitutions the people actually chose to enact.
        SiempreViernes 4y ago
        This is true of any law, there isn't actually anything except common agreement that constitutions should be treated more seriously giving them extra status, and there isn't anything but the consent of (enough) people giving laws any power: nobody is ever forced to follow any law, they are simply punished if they don't. However, once you decide to stay within the law it is indeed possible to have EU treaties stand above the constitution. In situations where you've added bits in your constitution that the EU treaty has priority, acting like this isn't true is simply breaking the law.
T-A 4y ago
> Is the ECJ kind of a Supreme Court that can overturn member state laws and rulings? Yes. See e.g. https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government_in_ireland/european_government/eu_law/european_laws.html#lc14b3 https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government_in_ireland/...
tokai 4y ago
The sovereign members of the EU have ratified treaties of European Union law themself.
- Longhanks 4y ago
  * some of the then-elected governments There was a national referendum before the Lisbon treaties that was declined by the Netherlands and France, which in turn "watered down" the EU constitution into the Lisbon treaties which are now in use, which were then ratified without any national votes. As the German politician Martin Scholz once said, if the EU were to apply for an EU membership, it would get declined because of a lack of a democratic foundation.
  - jltsiren 4y ago
    > As the German politician Martin Scholz once said, if the EU were to apply for an EU membership, it would get declined because of a lack of a democratic foundation. That's the way it should be. In a democratic state, the state itself is sovereign, while the citizens are not. The rights of the citizens depend on the constitution, which can be changed according to a democratic process. The EU is a union of sovereign states. Due to that sovereignty, decision-making in the EU cannot be fully democratic, as that would violate the sovereign rights of the member states.
    - Longhanks 4y ago
      Well, since I live in Switzerland, I am happy to disagree. Swiss people vote on many things multiple times per year and consider this a fundamental right and this the way it should be.
      - jltsiren 4y ago
        A sufficient majority of citizens can change the constitution and take that right away from you. Because you live in a democratic state, you do not have sovereign rights.
xyzzyz 4y ago
A good mental model is that EU works pretty much like US did 100 years ago. The US states were roughly as sovereign as EU states (with some important differences, especially in defense and immigration), and US federal government was similarly powerful to EU government. This has, of course, changed over the last century, and US states lost most of their sovereignty. I predict the same will happen to EU states over the next century.
- clarionbell 4y ago
  That would be in 1920s and states were far from sovereign back then. Maybe 1820s, then one could argue the union was more 'loose'. But even then, the union was pretty tight. Hence constant issue of slavery in federal law.
chippiewill 4y ago
Member states are sovereign insofar as the EU institutions only have jurisdiction because the member states allow them to do so. EU law only applies because local law says it applies. The ECJ is the highest court in any of the member countries because the law in those countries say it is. This differs from the situation in the US where Texas couldn't pass an amendment to their state constitution declaring that they are no longer subject to federal law. State law is subordinate to federal law / the US constitution.
- Longhanks 4y ago
  Couldn’t Texas exit the US in the same way that European countries can exit the EU?
  - anony999 4y ago
    Technically the answer is yes. In practice I believe there would be civil war before that happens.
    - IntrepidWorm 4y ago
      If the threat of secession requires going to war over, it would seem that no, secession is not a legally supported process.
      - Archelaos 4y ago
        But could it not be possible to allow the secession of a state by an ammentment to the constition?
        lstodd 4y ago
        Why bother? If things went so far that the secession is desired it is already a civil war, and constitution of 'some people out there over the creek' doesn't matter. I think that was the lesson of the 1860s.
    - 4y ago
anony999 4y ago
Who is 100% sovereign? Any kind of treaty makes you less "sovereign". I believe it's the same question about freedom. Are you a free person if you have a job, pay mortgage or marry someone?
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  > Who is 100% sovereign? 100%? Only those with a nuclear deterrent, and maybe not even them. Otherwise, there is always a bigger fish. Edit: I can see some people don't believe me. Do you really think treaties are more than paper if you don't have force to back them up? The US has threatened to invade the Hague if they try to charge Americans with war crimes. Went beyond mere threats in fact, congress and Bush the younger enshrined this threat in Federal Law.
  - theplumber 4y ago
    >> Do you really think treaties are more than paper if you don't have force to back them up? There is a foce that can build up. If the U.S starts going rough someone else will take its place. We've already seen pieces moving during Trump's term. U.S's soft power helps it more than you think. North Korea is more "sovereign" than the U.S. in your book. Good economic and political relations with your neighbours can make you more powerful than being a sovereign lunatic.
    - MichaelCollins 4y ago
      > North Korea is more "sovereign" than the U.S. in your book. In practice, the US can do much more of whatever it pleases than North Korea can. The US can invade most countries on a whim, and has demonstrated this ability numerous times in living memory, while the North Korean government mostly just fumes for the past few decades. But more to your point, yes, North Korea has more sovereignty than most; they are one of the few countries America can't invade on a whim.
      - theplumber 4y ago
NoboruWataya 4y ago
The supremacy of EU law is a pretty interesting one. It is a fundamental principle of the EU that EU law takes primacy/supremacy over national law (in areas where the EU has competence). How this actually works in practice can be a bit fuzzy, because the EU is certainly not going to send tanks into a member state's capital to enforce its laws. As I understand it, the way this usually works is by national law explicitly endorsing EU law (usually at the level of the national constitution) and stating that in the event of any contradiction between EU law and domestic law, EU law will prevail. So EU law is "supreme" in practice, but that supremacy is granted/recognised under the domestic constitutional order. In some countries, this recognition is limited, such that national courts will not permit EU law to override certain aspects of the national constitutional order. When that happens, there is really no easy solution. An interesting recent example is https://www.politico.eu/article/brussels-closes-case-against-germany-in-eu-law-supremacy-dispute/ https://www.politico.eu/article/brussels-closes-case-against... where the German court found that an ECB bond-buying programme was unconstitutional and in doing so refused to follow a prior decision of the ECJ. Another consequence of this approach to supremacy is that significant changes to the EU treaties require a constitutional amendment in Ireland, which requires a referendum. To my knowledge Ireland is the only country to have such a binding legal requirement, with the effect that a number of amendments to the treaties have in the past been delayed or defeated by the Irish public voting against them.
arlort 4y ago
Define sovereignty Member states have agency to leave the EU whenever they'd like if they wish not to be bound by agreed upon laws
drooopy 4y ago
I hate to break it to you, but there is no such thing as a 100% sovereign country anywhere in the world.
AdrianB1 4y ago
The member states are not 100% sovereign within the EU, there are some mechanisms to control it. For example, Romania (EU member country) has a provision that international treaties signed by the country override local legislation, so that EU directives - while not directly in effect - are above local legislation. Practically, if a national law is found to be not compliant with the EU legislation, the country has some time to adjust it to make it compliant or to repel it. In court cases, the Constitutional Court can directly strike the provision in the law or the entire law, as appropriate.

sofixa 4y ago

> I had the impression member states were 100% sovereign within the EU... ~80-90% depending on how you measure. The judiciary of all countries is technically under the ECJ jurisdiction. People can sue their countries, and local court decisions can be appealed to the European court structure (ECJ/ECHR). That was in fact one of the Brexit talking points, judiciary independence.

ectopod 4y ago
Just to be clear, the ECHR is not an EU court and brexit Britain is still under its jurisdiction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_R...
- M2Ys4U 4y ago
  And one cannot appeal a case from the court of a member state to the CJEU. Member states' courts can (in some cases must) refer specific questions of law, but that is not an appeal by any party to the dispute.

dagw 4y ago

ECJ can only rule on EU laws. So as such they are not overturning any German laws, just stating the the German law is not in compliance with EU regulations. What that means in practice varies a lot from case to case, but in general the EU has the power to fine members that are in breach of EU regulations. For practical reasons most EU countries want to be in compliance with EU law and will often follow ECJ recommendations and change their own laws if found to not be compliant. Also many EU countries have laws that essentially state that all their laws must comply with EU law. The other option is to apply for an explicit opt out of certain a EU regulation that you feel is incompatible with your own laws.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> many EU countries have laws that essentially state that all their laws must comply with EU law Isn’t granting the ECJ jurisdiction is a requirement of EU membership?
- Longhanks 4y ago
  EU treaties are not a constitution and the constitution the people gives itself stands above all.
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > EU treaties are not a constitution and the constitution the people gives itself stands above all Germany [1] and Hungary [2] played with this fire. In summary, no. Treaties have force of law. If a country improperly ratified their EU treaties, they need to amend their constitution (if it exists) or admit they never properly joined the EU in the first place. Given the latter means economic collapse for most EU members, it’s not a hard choice. [1] https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2020/06/nick-kenny-german-constitutional-court-eu/ https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2020/06/nick-kenny-german-... [2] https://www.reuters.com/world/first-eu-seen-moving-cut-money-hungary-over-damaging-democracy-2022-09-18/ https://www.reuters.com/world/first-eu-seen-moving-cut-money...
    - Longhanks 4y ago
      Once the people choose to no longer follow the EU Supreme Court, thus, as a follow up, no longer choose to follow the EU treaties, they exit the EU just as the UK did. No country is or can be forced to be a EU member. Just because there are economic implications does not mean the EU treaties are above the countries‘ constitutions the people actually chose to enact.
      - SiempreViernes 4y ago
        This is true of any law, there isn't actually anything except common agreement that constitutions should be treated more seriously giving them extra status, and there isn't anything but the consent of (enough) people giving laws any power: nobody is ever forced to follow any law, they are simply punished if they don't. However, once you decide to stay within the law it is indeed possible to have EU treaties stand above the constitution. In situations where you've added bits in your constitution that the EU treaty has priority, acting like this isn't true is simply breaking the law.

T-A 4y ago

> Is the ECJ kind of a Supreme Court that can overturn member state laws and rulings? Yes. See e.g. https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government_in_ireland/european_government/eu_law/european_laws.html#lc14b3 https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government_in_ireland/...

tokai 4y ago

The sovereign members of the EU have ratified treaties of European Union law themself.

Longhanks 4y ago
* some of the then-elected governments There was a national referendum before the Lisbon treaties that was declined by the Netherlands and France, which in turn "watered down" the EU constitution into the Lisbon treaties which are now in use, which were then ratified without any national votes. As the German politician Martin Scholz once said, if the EU were to apply for an EU membership, it would get declined because of a lack of a democratic foundation.
- jltsiren 4y ago
  > As the German politician Martin Scholz once said, if the EU were to apply for an EU membership, it would get declined because of a lack of a democratic foundation. That's the way it should be. In a democratic state, the state itself is sovereign, while the citizens are not. The rights of the citizens depend on the constitution, which can be changed according to a democratic process. The EU is a union of sovereign states. Due to that sovereignty, decision-making in the EU cannot be fully democratic, as that would violate the sovereign rights of the member states.
  - Longhanks 4y ago
    Well, since I live in Switzerland, I am happy to disagree. Swiss people vote on many things multiple times per year and consider this a fundamental right and this the way it should be.
    - jltsiren 4y ago
      A sufficient majority of citizens can change the constitution and take that right away from you. Because you live in a democratic state, you do not have sovereign rights.

xyzzyz 4y ago

A good mental model is that EU works pretty much like US did 100 years ago. The US states were roughly as sovereign as EU states (with some important differences, especially in defense and immigration), and US federal government was similarly powerful to EU government. This has, of course, changed over the last century, and US states lost most of their sovereignty. I predict the same will happen to EU states over the next century.

clarionbell 4y ago
That would be in 1920s and states were far from sovereign back then. Maybe 1820s, then one could argue the union was more 'loose'. But even then, the union was pretty tight. Hence constant issue of slavery in federal law.

chippiewill 4y ago

Member states are sovereign insofar as the EU institutions only have jurisdiction because the member states allow them to do so. EU law only applies because local law says it applies. The ECJ is the highest court in any of the member countries because the law in those countries say it is. This differs from the situation in the US where Texas couldn't pass an amendment to their state constitution declaring that they are no longer subject to federal law. State law is subordinate to federal law / the US constitution.

Longhanks 4y ago
Couldn’t Texas exit the US in the same way that European countries can exit the EU?
- anony999 4y ago
  Technically the answer is yes. In practice I believe there would be civil war before that happens.
  - IntrepidWorm 4y ago
    If the threat of secession requires going to war over, it would seem that no, secession is not a legally supported process.
    - Archelaos 4y ago
      But could it not be possible to allow the secession of a state by an ammentment to the constition?
      - lstodd 4y ago
        Why bother? If things went so far that the secession is desired it is already a civil war, and constitution of 'some people out there over the creek' doesn't matter. I think that was the lesson of the 1860s.
  - 4y ago

anony999 4y ago

Who is 100% sovereign? Any kind of treaty makes you less "sovereign". I believe it's the same question about freedom. Are you a free person if you have a job, pay mortgage or marry someone?

MichaelCollins 4y ago
> Who is 100% sovereign? 100%? Only those with a nuclear deterrent, and maybe not even them. Otherwise, there is always a bigger fish. Edit: I can see some people don't believe me. Do you really think treaties are more than paper if you don't have force to back them up? The US has threatened to invade the Hague if they try to charge Americans with war crimes. Went beyond mere threats in fact, congress and Bush the younger enshrined this threat in Federal Law.
- theplumber 4y ago
  >> Do you really think treaties are more than paper if you don't have force to back them up? There is a foce that can build up. If the U.S starts going rough someone else will take its place. We've already seen pieces moving during Trump's term. U.S's soft power helps it more than you think. North Korea is more "sovereign" than the U.S. in your book. Good economic and political relations with your neighbours can make you more powerful than being a sovereign lunatic.
  - MichaelCollins 4y ago
    > North Korea is more "sovereign" than the U.S. in your book. In practice, the US can do much more of whatever it pleases than North Korea can. The US can invade most countries on a whim, and has demonstrated this ability numerous times in living memory, while the North Korean government mostly just fumes for the past few decades. But more to your point, yes, North Korea has more sovereignty than most; they are one of the few countries America can't invade on a whim.
    - theplumber 4y ago

NoboruWataya 4y ago

The supremacy of EU law is a pretty interesting one. It is a fundamental principle of the EU that EU law takes primacy/supremacy over national law (in areas where the EU has competence). How this actually works in practice can be a bit fuzzy, because the EU is certainly not going to send tanks into a member state's capital to enforce its laws. As I understand it, the way this usually works is by national law explicitly endorsing EU law (usually at the level of the national constitution) and stating that in the event of any contradiction between EU law and domestic law, EU law will prevail. So EU law is "supreme" in practice, but that supremacy is granted/recognised under the domestic constitutional order. In some countries, this recognition is limited, such that national courts will not permit EU law to override certain aspects of the national constitutional order. When that happens, there is really no easy solution. An interesting recent example is https://www.politico.eu/article/brussels-closes-case-against-germany-in-eu-law-supremacy-dispute/ https://www.politico.eu/article/brussels-closes-case-against... where the German court found that an ECB bond-buying programme was unconstitutional and in doing so refused to follow a prior decision of the ECJ. Another consequence of this approach to supremacy is that significant changes to the EU treaties require a constitutional amendment in Ireland, which requires a referendum. To my knowledge Ireland is the only country to have such a binding legal requirement, with the effect that a number of amendments to the treaties have in the past been delayed or defeated by the Irish public voting against them.

arlort 4y ago

Define sovereignty Member states have agency to leave the EU whenever they'd like if they wish not to be bound by agreed upon laws

drooopy 4y ago

I hate to break it to you, but there is no such thing as a 100% sovereign country anywhere in the world.

AdrianB1 4y ago

The member states are not 100% sovereign within the EU, there are some mechanisms to control it. For example, Romania (EU member country) has a provision that international treaties signed by the country override local legislation, so that EU directives - while not directly in effect - are above local legislation. Practically, if a national law is found to be not compliant with the EU legislation, the country has some time to adjust it to make it compliant or to repel it. In court cases, the Constitutional Court can directly strike the provision in the law or the entire law, as appropriate.