¹ Fischer, Joschka, Vom Staatenverbund zur Föderation—Gedanken über die Finalität der europäischen Integration [From Confederacy to Federation: Thoughts on the Finality of European Integration] (May 12, 2000), http://whi-berlin.de/documents/fischer.pdf. See also What Kind of Constitution for What Kind of Polity? Responses to Joschka Fischer (Christian Joerges et al. eds., 2000) (illustrating how widely the lecture was noted).Google Scholar

² A chapter from Joseph H.H. Weiler's Ph.D. thesis was ground-breaking, see Joseph H.H. Weiler, The Community System: The Dual Character of Suprenationalism, 1 Y.B. Eur. L. 257–306 (1981), and then the seminal work he orchestrated, Integration Through Law: Europe and the American Federal Experience (Mauro Cappelletti et al. eds., 1985).Google Scholar

³ See Presidency Conclusions of the Lisbon Council of Mar. 23–24 2000, Eur. Parl. Doc., http://www.europarl.europa.eu/summits/lis1_en.htm.Google Scholar

⁴ See Joerges, Christian, What is left of the European Economic Constitution? A Melancholic Eulogy, 30 Eur. L. Rev. 461, 465 (2005); Christian Joerges, Europa nach dem Ordoliberalismus: Eine Philippika, 43 Kritische Justiz 394 (2010).Google Scholar

⁵ Ernst-Joachim Mestmäcker, Macht-Recht-Wirtschaftsverfassun, 137 Zeitschrift für das gesamte Handelsrecht und Wirtschaftsrecht 97, 106 (1973). The essay is the elaboration of the lecture which he have at the Verein für Socialpolitik conference in Bonn in 1972. Ernst-Joachim Mestmäcker, Power, Law and Economic Constitution, 11 German Econ. Rev. 177–192 (1973).Google Scholar

⁶ See Wegmann, Milène, Früher Neoliberalismus und Europäische Integration (2002) (re-constructing this scenario thoroughly). Her work corresponds instructively to Wolfgang Fikentscher's earlier magnum opus on Wirtschaftsrecht (economic law). Id. Decades before the studies on global governance, European governance, the relation between the levels and the impact of transnational governance on national statehood became en vogue in political science, and “constitutionalism beyond the state” became everybody's concern in legal scholarship, Fikentscher had conceptualized Wirtschaftsrecht (1983) in truly transnational and constitutional perspectives, and composed the two monumental volumes accordingly: The first volume is dedicated to Weltwirtschaftsrecht (world economic law) and Europäisches Wirtschaftsrecht (European economic law); national economic law (Deutsches Wirtschaftsrecht) is presented upon this basis. This conceptualization documents the truly universalist commitments of the ordo-liberal tradition which Wegmann emphasises in her reconstruction of the ordo-liberal tradition.Google Scholar

⁷ Ernst-Joachim Mestmäcker, Address at the Verein für Socialpolitik Conference: Macht-Recht-Wirtschaftsverfassung [Power-Law-Economic Constitution] (1972); Mestmäcker, supra note 5, at 109.Google Scholar

⁸ Mestmäcker, supra note 5, at 109.Google Scholar

⁹ Hölderlin, Friedrich, Patmos Dem Landgrafen von Homburg überreichte Handschrift (1802), quoted in Friedrich Höderlin Werke 379 (1954), translated in Michael Hamburger, Friedrich Hölderlin, Selected Poems and Fragments 243 (1994).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Weber, Max, The National State and Economic Policy (Freiburg Address), 9 Econ. & Soc'y 428, 438 (Ben Fowkes trans., 1980) (1895).Google Scholar

¹¹ Weber, Max, Inaugural Lecture at Freiburg: Der Nationalstaat und die Volkswirtschaftspolitik (May 1895), at 1–2.Google Scholar

¹² See Aldenhoff, Rita, Nationalökonomie, Nationalstaat und Werturteile. Wissenschaftskritik in Max Webers Freiburger Antrittsrede im Kontext der Wissenschaftsdebatten in den 1890er Jahren, in Deutsche Rechts– und Sozialphilosophie um 1900 79–90 (Gerhard Sprenger ed., 1991).Google Scholar

¹³ Mestmäcker, supra note 5, at 108–09.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Mestmäcker, supra note 5, at 102.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Mestmäcker, supra note 5, at 103.Google Scholar

¹⁶ See Müller-Armack, Alfred, Wirtschaftsordnung und Wirtschaftspolitik. Studien und Konzepte zur sozialen Marktwirtschaft und zur europäischen Integration (1966); Alfred Müller-Armack, Genealogie der sozialen Marktwirtschaft. Frühschriften und weiterführende Konzepte (1974).Google Scholar

¹⁷ Scharpf, Fritz W., The Asymmetry of European Integration, or Why the EU Cannot be a “Social Market Economy,” 8 Socio-Econ. Rev. 211–250 (2010) (including references to earlier works); see Florian Rödl, Die Idee demokratischer und sozialer Union im Verfassungsrecht der EU [The Idea of a Democratic and Social Union in the Constitutional Law of the EU], in Wohlfahrtsstaatlichkeit und soziale Demokratie in der EU [Welfarism and Social Democracy in the EU] 1 Europarecht 179–204 (Jürgen Bast & Florian Rödl eds., 2013).Google Scholar

¹⁸ Int'l Lab. Org., Social Aspects of European Economic Co-operation: Report by a Group of Experts, 74 Int'l Lab. Rev. 99–123 (1956).Google Scholar

¹⁹ Ruggie, John G., International Regimes, Transactions and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Postwar Economic Order, 36 Int'l Org. 375, 392 (1982).Google Scholar

²⁰ See Claire M. O'Brien, The UN Special Representative on Business and Human Rights: Re-embedding or disembedding transnational markets?, in Karl Polanyi: Globalisation and the Potential of Law in Transnational Markets 323–357 (Christian Joerges & Josef Falke eds., 2011) (discussing Ruggie's later view).Google Scholar

²¹ Rödl, Florian, Labour Constitution, in Principles of European Constitutional Law 605–640 (Armin von Bogdandy & Jürgen Bast eds., 2010); Stefano Giubboni, Social Rights and Market Freedoms in the European Constitution: A Labour Law Perspective 7–15 (2006).Google Scholar

²² In principle, Hans Peter Ipsen's term “continuous re-configuration,” (Wandelverfassung) means nothing else. See Hans Peter Ipsen, Europäische Verfassung—Nationale Verfassung, in Europarecht 195, 201 (1987).Google Scholar

²³ Friedrich August von Hayek, The Road to Serfdom (1944).Google Scholar

²⁴ Popper, Karl, The Open Society and its Enemies (1945).Google Scholar

²⁵ Polanyi, Karl, The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time (2001). See, e.g., Jens Beckert, MPIfG Discussion Paper 07/6: The Social Order of Markets, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies (2007); Wolfgang Streeck, Re-Forming Capitalism: Institutional Change in the German Political Economy 154–156 (2009); Fred Block & Marget E. Somers, Karl Polanyi and the Writing of The Great Transformation, in The Power of Market fundamentalism: Karl Polany's Critique 73–97 (2014) (discussing Polanyi's topicality).Google Scholar

²⁶ Polanyi, Karl, The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time 69 (2001).Google Scholar

²⁷ Ebner, See Alexander, Transnational Markets and the Polanyi Problem, in Karl Polanyi: Globalisation and the Potential of Law in Transnational Markets 19, 29 (Christian Joerges & Josef Falke eds., 2011).Google Scholar

²⁸ See Joerges, Christian, Law and Politics in Europe's Crisis: On the History of the Impact of an Unfortunate Configuration, 21 Constellations (forthcoming 2014). The growing interest in Polanyi and the renaissance of economic sociology is due to current events, but is nonetheless more robust. See references supra note 25.Google Scholar

²⁹ Polanyi states: “To allow the market mechanism to be the sole director of the fate of human beings and their natural environment, indeed, even of the amount and use of purchasing power, would result in the demolition of society … [N]o society could stand the effects of such a system of crude fictions even for the shortest stretch of time unless its human and natural substance as well as its business organization was protected against the ravages of this satanic mill.” See Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time 73 (2001).Google Scholar

³⁰ Treaty, Euratom, Consolidated Version of the Treaty Establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, Mar. 30, 2010, 2010 O.J. (C 84) 1 [hereinafter Euratom Treaty].Google Scholar

³¹ The silence of the Euratom Treaty is deafening: The EAEC Treaty did not grant the Community the competence to “authorise the construction or operation of nuclear installations.” See Comm'n v. Council, CJEU Case C–29/99, 2002 E.C.R. I–11281/11311, para. 89. See Christian Joerges, The Timeliness of Direct Democracy in the EU – and the contest over atomic energy in conflicts-law perspectives in International Constitutional Law in Legal Education: Proceedings of the Erasmus Intensive Programme NICLAS 2010–2012, 89-100 (Jürgen Busch et al. eds., 2014) (critizing this legal situation).Google Scholar

³² Consolidated Version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union art. 194, Oct. 26, 2010, 2010 O.J. (C 326) 47 [hereinafter TFEU].Google Scholar

³³ Int'l Transp. Workers' Fed'n v. Viking Line ABP, CJEU Case C–438/05, 2007 E.C.R. I–10779; Laval un Partneri Ltd. v. Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundet, CJEU Case C–341/05, 2007 E.C.R. I–11767; Rüffert v. Land Niedersachsen, CJEU Case C–346/06, 2008 E.C.R. I–01989.Google Scholar

³⁴ Joerges, Christian, Unity in Diversity as Europe's Vocation and Conflicts Law as Europe's Constitutional Form, in The Changing Role of Law in the Age of Supra- and Trans-national Governance 125, 151–61 (Rainer Nickel & Andrea Greppi eds., 2014) (discussing this issue more extensively).Google Scholar

³⁵ Schulz-Forberg, Hagen & Stråth, Bo, The Political History of European Integration: The Hypocrisy of Democracy-through-Market 43 (2010).Google Scholar

³⁶ Joerges, Christian, The Idea of a Three-dimensional Conflicts Law as Constitutional Form, in Constitutionalism, Multilevel Trade Governance and International Economic Law 413, 420 (Christian Joerges & Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann eds., 2011).Google Scholar

³⁷ See Glasman, Maurice, Unnecessary Suffering: Managing Market Utopia 96, 98 (1996); Fritz W. Scharpf, Monetary Union, Fiscal Crisis, and the Pre-emption of Democracy, 2–24 (5 MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/11, 2011) (discussing this in the context of the 1970s); see also Colin Crouch, The Strange Non-Death of Neo-Liberalism 49–124 (2011); Peter E. Hall, Commentary, Brother, Can You Paradigm?, 26 Governance: An Int‘l J. of Pol‘y, Admin. & Institutions 189 (2013) (evaluting this matter in the present).Google Scholar

³⁸ See Lepsius, M. Rainer, Institutionalisierung und Deinstitutionalisierung von Rationalitätskriterien, in Institutionenwandel, Leviathan Sonderheft 16/1996 57 (Gerhard Göhler ed., 1997); see also M. Rainer Lepsius, The European Union as a Sovereignty Association of a Special Nature, in What Kind of Constitution for What Kind of Polity? 213–222 (Christian Joerges, Yves Mény & Joseph H.H. Weiler eds., 2000) (considering how this applies to Europe).Google Scholar

³⁹ Resolution of the European Council on the Stability and Growth Pact, 1997 O.J. (C 236); TFEU art. 126.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ See Joerges, Christian, Rethinking European Law's Supremacy: A Plea for a Supranational Conflict of Laws, in Debating the Democratic Legitimacy of the European Union 311, 318 (Beate Kohler-Koch & Berthold Rittberger eds., 2007); see also Gunther Teubner, Constitutional Fragments: Societal Constitutionalism in Globalization 158–163 (2012) (discussing this issue further).Google Scholar

⁴¹ Bundesverfassungsgericht [BVerfG – Federal Constitutional Court], Case No. 2 BvR 2134/92 & 2 BvR 2159/92, 89 Entscheidungen des Bundesverfassungsgerichts [BVerfGE] 155 (Oct. 12, 1993). See Christian Joerges, States Without a Market: Comments on the German Constitutional Court's Maastricht-Judgment and a Plea for Interdisciplinary Discourses (NISER Working Paper, 1996), available at http://eiop.or.at/eiop/pdf/1997-020.pdf; Michelle Everson, Beyond the Bundesverfassungsgericht: On the Necessary Cunning of Constitutional Law, 4 Eur. L. J. 389 (1998).Google Scholar

⁴² Instead, the Court was confronted with its talk of an “association of states,” its announcement that it would refuse to follow ultra vires legal acts, but above all, the statement that its democratic rule presupposes that a “relatively homogeneous people” has the opportunity “to give legal expression to what unifies them— intellectually, socially, and politically.” Joseph H.H. Weiler, Does Europe Need a Constitution? Reflections on Demos, Telos and the German Maastricht Decision, 1 Eur. L. J. 219 (1995); see infra text accompanying notes 44– 50.Google Scholar

⁴³ See Ernst-Joachum Mestmäcker, Europäische Prüfsteine der Herrschaft und des Rechts, 58 ORDO: Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft 3, 3–5 (2007) (restating this position).Google Scholar

⁴⁴ See Joerges, Christian, What is Left of the European Economic Constitution: A Melancholic Eulogy, 30 Eur. L. Rev. 461, 465 (2005) (discussing this matter in greater detail).Google Scholar

⁴⁵ See Eichengreen, Barry, Should the Maastricht Treaty be Saved?, 74 Princeton Stud. in Int'l Fin. (1992).Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Eichengreen, Barry, Institutions for Fiscal Stability (Working Paper PEIF No. 6, 2003).Google Scholar

⁴⁷ See, e.g., Bofinger, Peter, Are There Alternatives to the Stability Pact? Three Experts Answer, DIE ZEIT (Nov. 20, 2003), http://www.zeit.de/2003/49/Oekonom_I (contribution of Barry Eichengreen) (“The 3% cap is at best ridiculous and at worst perverse.”).Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Majone, Giandomenico, Rethinking European Integration After the Debt Crisis (UCL Working Paper No. 3, 2012), available at http://www.ucl.ac.uk/european-institute/analysis-publications/publications/WP3.pdf.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Council Decision 2011/199, 2011 O.J. (L 91) 1 (amending Art. 136 TFEU with regard to a stability mechanism for Member States whose currency is the euro).Google Scholar

⁵⁰ See infra Part D.III (evaluating the Constitutional Court's decision on Greece). The reasons provided in plaintiff Peter Gauweiler's constitutional complaint by Dietrich Murswiek are available online. UNI Freiburg: Institute for Public Law, http://www.jura.uni-freiburg.de/institute/ioeffr3/forschung/gutachten.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Seidel, Martin, Der Euro—Schutzschild oder Falle? (ZEI Working Paper No. B01, 2010).Google Scholar

⁵² “Money … is merely a token of purchasing power which, as a rule, is not produced at all, but comes into being through the mechanism of banking or state finance.” Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time 72 (2001). See Sabine Frerichs, From Credit to Crisis: Max Weber, Karl Polanyi, and the Other Side of the Coin, 40 J. of L. & Soc'y 7–26 (2013).Google Scholar

⁵³ Streeck, Wolfgang, The Crises of Democratic Capitalism, 71 New Left Rev. 5 (2011). See also Wolfgang Streeck, MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/15: The Crisis in Context Democratic Capitalism and Its Contradictions, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies (2011), available at http://www.mpifg.de/pu/mpifg_dp/dp11-15.pdf.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ See Majone, Giandomenico, Europe as the Would-be World Power: The EU at Fifty, Foreign Affairs, Jan. 2010, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/65854/giandomenico-majone/europe-as-the-would-be-world-power-the-eu-at-fifty.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Scharpf, Fritz W., MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/11: Monetary Union, Fiscal Crisis, and the Preemption of Democracy, 5 Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies (2011).Google Scholar

⁵⁶ See Economic and Financial Affairs, Council of the Eur. Union, http://www.consilium.europa.eu/press/press-releases/economic-and-financial-affairs?lang=en&BID=93 (updating information continuously).Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Suffice it here to refer to just a few examples from the torrent of literature. Christian Calliess, Perspektiven des Euro zwischen Solidarität und Recht—Eine rechtliche Analyse der Griechenlandhilfe und des Rettungsschirms, Zeitschrift für Europarechtliche Studien 213 (2011); Matthias Ruffert, The European Debt Crisis and European Union Law, 49 Common Mkt. L. Rev. 1777 (2011); Paul Craig, The Lisbon Treaty: Law, Politics, and Treaty Reform 457–517 (2013) (forthcoming, Chapter 12 on “Financial Crisis, Response, and Europe's Future”). See also Nicole Scicluna, EU Constitutionalism in the Twenty-first Century: Politics and Law in Crisis (2013) (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, La Trobe University) (analyzing Europe's present constitutional constellation, its Vefassungswirklichkeit, in Chapter 5).Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Communication from the Commission, COM (2010) 2020 final (Mar. 3, 2010).Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Communication from the Commission, COM (2010) 250 final (May 12, 2010).Google Scholar

⁶⁰ The Framework Agreement was concluded by the ECOFIN Council and confirmed by the European Council, Brussels on June 17, 2010. Council Conclusion No. 2 of June 17, 2010, EUCO 13/10.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Council Conclusion No. 3 of Mar. 25, 2011, Annex I, EUCO 10/11.Google Scholar

⁶² Council Decision 2011/199, 2011 O.J. (L 91) 1 (amending Art. 136 TFEU with regard to a stability mechanism for Member States whose currency is the euro).Google Scholar

⁶³ Council Regulations 1173–1177/2011, 2011 O.J. (L 91) 1; Council Directive 2011/85, 2011 O.J. (L 91) 1.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ See the Communication of the euro area Member States as well as the Treaty on Stability, Co-ordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union in the version of Jan. 20, 2012, available at: http://european-council.europa.eu/media/639235/st00tscg26_en12.pdf.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ See Press Release, European Parliament, Green light for economic governance “two pack” (Mar. 12, 2013), http://www.europarl.europa.eu/pdfs/news/expert/infopress/20130312IPR06439/20130312IPR06439_en.pdf.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ See Stolleis, Michael, Reluctance to Glance in the Mirror: The Changing Face of German Jurisprudence After 1933 and Post-1945, in Darker Legacies of Law in Europe: The Shadow of National Socialism and Fascism over Europe and its Legal Traditions 1–18 (Christian Joerges & Navraj S. Ghaleigh eds., 2003) (Stolleis' observations concern primarily, but by no means exclusively, Germany's Nazi period).Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Lorz, R. Alexander & Sauer, Heiko, Ersatzunionsrecht und Grundgesetz – Verfassungsrechtliche Zustimmungsgrundlagen für den Fiskalpakt, den ESM-Vertrag und die Änderung des AEUV, in 65 Die Öffentliche Verwaltung 573–612 (2012), cited in the judgment of the German Constitutional Court of Sept. 12, 2012, infra note 89, at para. 257 of the German version, and para. 226 of the English version.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Pertinent practices have been exercised by central banks and the IMF long before the financial crisis. They have been characterised as a feature of the global capital market: “The new conditionality of the global economic system—the requirements that need to be met for a country to become integrated into the global capital market — … facilitates the task of instituting a certain kind of monetary policy.” Saskia Sassen, De-Nationalized State Agendas and Privatized Norm-Making, in Public Governance in the Age of Globalization 51, 56 (Karl-Heinz Ladeur ed., 2004).Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Ireland, Pringle v., CJEU Case C-370/12 (Nov. 27, 2012), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Weiler, Joseph H.H., The Community System: The Dual Character of Supranationalism, 1 Y.B. of Eur. L. 257, 257 (1981).Google Scholar

⁷¹ Christine, Reh, European Integration as Compromise: Recognition, Concessions and the Limits of Cooperation, 47 Gov't and Opposition 414–40 (2012).Google Scholar

⁷² There are more, but they are rare. For another noteworthy exception with a great sensitivity for the hybrid nature of the Union praxis, see Edoardo Chiti & Pedro Gustavo Teixeira, The Constitutional Implications of the European Responses to the Financial and Public Debt Crisis, in 50 Common Mkt. L. Rev. 683, 685, 690 (2013). Chiti and Tereiro, throughout their analyses, assess what they lucidly describe through functional and normative yardsticks and thereby soften their critique; their conclusion is nonetheless uncompromising on this point: The new hybrid method “tends to set aside the role of EU institutions in exercising their respective competences within a democratic framework based on EU law in favour of power-based intergovernmental relations.” Id. at 708. But this is precisely the reason why not only democracy but also the rule of law in its core transnational function—as we have underlined it in Part B—is at stake.Google Scholar

⁷³ Dawson, Mark & Witte, Floris de, Constitutional Balance in the EU After the Euro-Crisis, 76 Mod. L. Rev. 817-844 (2013) at 838. They conclude that “the rise of executive control via the European Council, the increasing ease of making Treaty and legislative reforms without consulting smaller member states, and the creation of eternal fiscal rules uncontrollable by national parliaments, unable to be fully discussed and legitimated, is now in danger of desensitising the Union. …” Id.at 842. Indeed, and it is true “that the Union's existing response … does not bode well for the future.” Id. at 844. What remains to be explained is Europe's apparent political inability to organize a legally robust response to these insights. See discussion infra.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Least from Germany, which has in 2009 constitutionalized the Schuldenbremse in Article 109 Basic Law. Constitutional provisions, however, are easier to amend than multilateral treaties.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Suffice it here to point to the analysis submitted by political scientist Martin Höpner and lawyer Florian Rödl, Illegitim und rechtswidrig: Das neue makroökonomische Regime im Euroraum, in ZBW – Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft 219–21 (2012); similarly Jürgen Bast & Florian Rödl, Jenseits der Koordinierung? Zu den Grenzen der EU-Verträge für eine Europäische Wirtschaftsregierung, in 39 Europäische Grundrechte-Zeitschrift 269–78 (2012). The authors demonstrate in detail that the Council's power of surveillance in accordance with Article 136(1) (b) does not provide for the sanctions which the new regime establishes. Although the coordinating competencies in accordance with Article 121 TFEU (3) and (4) provide for reporting requirements on the part of the Member States as well as recommendations by the Commission, Article 121(6) TFEU does not permit mandatory sanctions. Indeed, the multilateral surveillance in accordance with Article 121(3) and (4) TFEU contains provisions for reports, recommendations, and warnings, but no security deposits (whether or not they bear interest) or fines. Article 121(6) is aimed at removing the right to regulate the details of the procedures in accordance with Article 121(3) and (4) TFEU. The assumption that the Council could reject recommendations from the Commission concerning surveillance only with a qualified majority—but also that such a shift in the institutional structure would be up for negotiation by the Member States—is untenable. This arrangement has created a hybrid of justice and injustice by establishing a regulatory machinery which is not provided for in the Union's legal framework and is to be superimposed on the Member States' institutions and political procedures. See also Andreas Fischer-Lescano, The European TSCG and EU Law (2012), http://www.eunews.it/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/2012_09_06_Fischer-Lescano_Gutachten-kurz_Fiskalpakt_060912-EN.pdf, and Lukas Oberndorfer, Der Fiskalpakt—Umgehung der ‘europäischen Verfassung’ und Durchbrechung demokratischer Verfahren?, in Juridikum 168–81 (2012).Google Scholar

⁷⁶ See Joerges, Christian, A New Alliance of De-Legalisation and Legal Formalism? Reflections on the Response to the Social Deficit of the European Integration Project, in Demokratie in der Weltgesellschaft. Soziale Welt Sonderband 18, 437–50 (Hauke Brunkhorst ed., 2009).Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Thym, Daniel, Euro-Rettungsschirm: zwischenstaatliche Rechtskonstruktion und verfassungsgerichtliche Kontrolle, in 25 Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 167–71 (2011); Daniel Thym, Annotation to GCC, Judgment of 7.9.2011, in 66 Juristenzeitung 2011–15 (2011). As a student of the “Darker Legacies of Law in Europe,” I cannot refrain from a plea for linguistic sensitivity. It is one thing for Joseph H.H. Weiler to introduce “total law” as a trademark, or for Loïc Azoulai to write about “total harmonisation”; Germans must not disregard the connotations of such terms. The same holds true for the establishment of secondary legal regimes. Germans are as free as anybody else to approve such developments, but they should make it clear that they are aware of the shadow of Ernst Fränkel's Doppelstaat and Franz Neumann's Behemoth. Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Thym, Daniel, Euro-Rettungsschirm: zwischenstaatliche Rechtskonstruktion und verfassungsgerichtliche Kontrolle, 25 Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 167–71 (2011); Daniel Thym, Annotation to GCC, Judgment of 7.9.2011, 66 Juristenzeitung 1011, 1014 (Christian Joerges trans., 2011). This is, by now, the dominant position in European constitutionalism. This is a recent acquis, however. As late as 2011—and hence in the middle of the crisis—De Witte considered that the German constitutional court might declare the EFSF to be incompatible with German constitutional law and an ultra vires act in contravention of the “no-bailout” provision of Article 125 TFEU. Bruno de Witte, The European Treaty Amendment for the Creation of a Financial Stability Mechanism, in Eur. Pol'y Analysis 1, 6 (2011). This was, indeed, a widely-shared concern; see, e.g., Nikolas Busse, Unter Aufsicht. Nicht nur im Fall Griechenland: Die Deutsche Europapolitik wartet auf Karlsruhe, Frankfuter Allgemeine Zeitung (2010). Bruno de Witte has clarified his position on various occasions, particularly succinctly in Loïc Azoulai et al., Another Legal Monster? An EUI Debate on the Fiscal Compact Treaty, in EUI Working Papers Law No. 09, 6–8 (Anna Kocharov ed., 2012). His argument is far more sophisticated than the one cited in the text. But is not possible to come to terms with the TSCG simply because that Treaty states in Article 2 No. 2: “This Treaty shall apply in full to the Contracting Parties whose currency is the euro. It shall also apply to the other Contracting Parties to the extent and under the conditions set out in Article 14.” In the draft circulated until 2 March 2012, one could read: “This Treaty shall apply insofar as it is compatible with the Treaties on which the European Union is founded and with European Union law. It shall not encroach upon the competence of the Union to act in the area of the economic union.” What happened to the compatibility with the Union's primary law, one wonders. We must reckon with conflicts between the law of the Union as enshrined in the Treaties on the one hand, and the Fiscal Compact and the regulatory machinery established in response to the crisis on the other. The Fiscal Compact in its latest version simply assumes that, in such conflicts, it will prevail.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ See David, M. & Trubek, Luise G., Hard and Soft Law in the Construction of Social Europe: The Role of the Open Method of Co-ordination, 11 Eur. L. J. 343–64 (2005), and the critique in Christian Joerges, Integration Through De-Legalisation?, 33 Eur. L. Rev. 219–312 (2008).Google Scholar

⁸⁰ By contrast, the proponents of the OMC relied on the well premises of deliberative polyarchy and/or democratic experimentalism: “In deliberative polyarchy, problem-solving depends not on harmony and spontaneous co-ordination, but on the permanent disequilibrium of incentives and interests imperfectly aligned, and on the disciplined, collaborative exploration of the resulting differences.” Joshua Cohen & Charles F. Sabel, Sovereignty and Solidarity: EU and US, in Public Governance in the Age of Globalization 157, 168 (Karl-Heinz Ladeur ed., 2004). This is a formula which is very close to many methodological pronouncements within the conflicts-law approach and its plea for a proceduralisation. See supra notes 31, 33. The proponents of the latter approach diagnose, sadly, that conflicts-law constitutionalism has become a critic which can no longer be presented as a re-constructive approach. See Christian Joerges & Maria Weimer, A Crisis of Executive Managerialism in the EU: No Alternative?, in Critical Legal Perspectives on Global Governance: Liber Amicorum for David M Trubek (Gráínne de Búrca, Claire Kilpatrick & Joanne Scott eds., 2013). The most prominent proponents of OMC and democratic experimentalism see, apparently, no reason for such modesty and re-design. See Charles F. Sabel & Jonathan Zeitlin, Experimentalism in the EU: Common Ground and Persistent Differences, in 6 Regulation & Governance 410–426 (2012).Google Scholar

⁸¹ For a deepened analysis, see Giandomenico Majone, Rethinking European Integration After the Debt Crisis, UCL Working Paper No. 3, at 19 (2012), available at http://www.ucl.ac.uk/european-institute/highlights/majone; Fritz W. Scharpf, Monetary Union, Fiscal Crisis and the Preemption of Democracy, MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/11, Cologne 2011; Fritz W. Scharpf, Legitimacy Intermediation in the Multilevel European Polity and its Collapse in the Euro Crisis, MPIfG Discussion Paper 12/6, Cologne 2012. What both authors implicitly confirm is the validity of Polanyi's insights in the social embeddedness of the economy. See supra notes 25–28.Google Scholar

⁸² The following passages on the crisis jurisprudence of the GCC and the CJEU draw on Michelle Everson & Christian Joerges, Who is the Guardian for Constitutionalism in Europe After the Financial Crisis?, in Political Representation in the European Union: Still Democratic in Times of Crisis? 400–28 (Sandra Kröger ed., 2014).Google Scholar

⁸³ See Piqani, Darinka, Supremacy of EU Law and the Jurisprudence of Constitutional Reservations in Central Eastern Europe and the Western Balkans: Towards a ‘Holistic’ Constitutionalism (June 11, 2010) (Ph.D thesis, EUI Florence), and Federico Fabbrini, The Euro-Crisis and the Courts: Judicial Review and the Political Process in Comparative Perspective, Berkeley J. Int'l L. (forthcoming 2014).Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Weiler, Joseph H.H., The ‘Lisbon Urteil’ and the Fast Food Culture, 20 Eur. J. Int'l L. 505, 505 (2009), commenting on Bundesverfassungsgericht [BVerfG – Federal Constitutional Court], Case No. 2 BvE 2/08, 2 BvE 5/08, 2 BvR 1010/08, 2 BvR 1022/08, 2 BvR 1259/08, 2 BvR 182/09 (June 30, 2009), http://www.bverfg.de/entscheidungen/es20090630_2bve000208en.html [hereinafter Judgment of June 30, 2009].Google Scholar

⁸⁵ See infra Part D.I.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ Judgment of June 30, 2009. Google Scholar

⁸⁷ See infra Part D.I.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Bundesverfassungsgericht [BVerfG – Federal Constitutional Court], Case No. 2 BvR 987/10, 2 BvR 1485/10, 2 BvR 1099/10 (Sept. 7, 2011), http://www.bverfg.de/entscheidungen/rs20110907_2bvr098710en.html [hereinafter Judgment of Sept. 7, 2011]. Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Bundesverfassungsgericht [BVerfG – Federal Constitutional Court], Case No. 2 BvR 1390/12 (Sept. 12, 2012), http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/entscheidungen/rs20120912_2bvr139012en.html [English translation], http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/entscheidungen/rs20120912_2bvr139012.html [German] [hereinafter Judgment of Sept. 12, 2012].Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Namely, , the Währungsunion-Finanzstabilisierungsgesetz, (Monetary Union Financial Stabilisation Act), which grants the authorization to provide aid to Greece, and the Gesetz zur Übernahme von Gewährleistungen im Rahmen eines europäischen Stabilisierungsmechanismus, (Act Concerning the Giving of Guarantees in the Framework of a European Stabilisation Mechanism).Google Scholar

⁹¹ Judgment of Sept. 7, 2011 at paras. 121–23.Google Scholar

⁹² Id. at para. 124.Google Scholar

⁹³ Id. at paras. 130–32.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Id. at para. 116 (referencing the decisions on Maastricht [BVerfGE 89, 155, 175] and Honeywell [BVerfGE 126, 286, 302 et seq.]); in the Maastricht decision, see also paras. 129 & 137 on commitment to the stability concept.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Bundesverfassungsgericht [BVerfG – Federal Constitutional Court], Case No. 2 BvR 2661/06 (July 6, 2010), https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/entscheidungen/rs20100706_2bvr266106en.html.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Judgment of Sept. 7, 2011 at para. 129. The court adds: “In this connection, particular mention should be made of the prohibition of direct purchase of debt instruments of public institutions by the European Central Bank, the prohibition of accepting liability (bailout clause) and the stability criteria for sound budget management (Articles 123 to 126, Article 136 TFEU).” Id. This remark attracted considerable attention but has not been taken too seriously by the ECB.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ Id. at para. 98.Google Scholar

⁹⁸ Ruffert, Mattias, Die europäische Schuldenkrise vor dem Bundesverfassungsgericht – Anmerkung zum Urteil vom 7. September 2011, Europarecht 842, 844 (2011).Google Scholar

⁹⁹ Judgment of Sept. 7, 2011 at para. 109.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ Id. at para. 116.Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ See Thym, Daniel, Annotation to GCC, Judgment of 7.9.2011, 66 Juristenzeitung 1015 (2011).Google Scholar

¹⁰² Judgment of Sept. 12, 2012 at para. 180.Google Scholar

¹⁰³ See Geyer, Christian, Anatomie einer Hintergehung [Anatomy of a Deceit], Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, June 21, 2012, at 29.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ The German version reads:Google Scholar

Die haushaltspolitische Gesamtverantwortung des Deutschen Bundestags wird in Ansehung der Übertragung der Währungshoheit auf das Europäische System der Zentralbanken namentlich durch die Unterwerfung der Europäischen Zentralbank under die strengen Kriterien des Vertrages über die Arbeitsweise der Europäischen Union und der Satzung des Europäischen Systems der Zentralbanken hinsichtlich der Unabhängigkeit der Zentralbank und die Priorität der Geldwertstabilität gesichert. Ein wesentliches Element zur unionsrechtlichen Absicherung der verfassungsrechtlichen Anforderungen aus Art. 20 Abs. 1 und Abs. 2 in Verbindung mit Art. 79 Abs. 3 GG ist insoweit das Verbtot monetärer Haushaltsfinanzierung durch die Europäische Zentralbank. Google Scholar

Judgment of Sept. 12, 2012 at para. 116. Paragraph 220 in the English translation reads:Google Scholar

In view of the transfer of monetary sovereignty to the European System of Central Banks, the German Bundestag's overall budgetary responsibility is safeguarded particularly by the fact that the European Central Bank subjects itself to the strict criteria of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and of the Statute of the European System of Central Banks with regard to the independence of the Central Bank and to the priority of monetary stability (see BVerfGE 89, 155 <204-205, 207 et seq.>; 129, 124 <181-182>). In this context, an essential element of safeguarding the constitutional requirements resulting from Article 20(1) and (2) in conjunction with Article 79(3) of the Basic Law in European Union Law is the prohibition of monetary financing by the European Central Bank (see BVerfGE 89, 155 <204-205>; 129, 124 <181-182>).;+129,+124+<181-182>).+In+this+context,+an+essential+element+of+safeguarding+the+constitutional+requirements+resulting+from+Article+20(1)+and+(2)+in+conjunction+with+Article+79(3)+of+the+Basic+Law+in+European+Union+Law+is+the+prohibition+of+monetary+financing+by+the+European+Central+Bank+(see+BVerfGE+89,+155+<204-205>;+129,+124+<181-182>).>Google Scholar

Id. at para 220. Paragraph 170 is not yet translated. The German original reads: “Da der Bundestag durch seine Zustimmung zu Stabilitätshilfen den verfassungsrechtlich gebotenen Einfluss ausüben und Höhe, Konditionalität und Dauer der Stabilitätshilfen zugunsten hilfesuchender Mitgliedstaaten mitbestimmen kann, legt er selbst die wichtigste Grundlage für später möglicherweise erfolgende Kapitalabrufe nach Art. 9 Abs. 2 ESMV.” Id. at para. 170.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁵ See id. paras. 219–20, 232–33, 239–79, 300–19.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ Id. at para. 206 in the English extract, para. 222 in the German original.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ See supra Part F.I.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁸ Judgment of Sept. 12, 2012 at para 169 [English version].Google Scholar

¹⁰⁹ Id. at paras. 201.Google Scholar

¹¹⁰ Habermas, Jürgen, Drei Gründe für ‘Mehr Europa‘ [Three Reasons for “More Europe”] (2012), reprinted in Jürgen Habermas, Im Sog der Technokratie 132–37 (2013).Google Scholar

¹¹¹ For a similar critique, see Henning Deters, National Constitutional Jurisprudence in a Post-National Europe: The ESM Ruling of the German Federal Constitutional Court, 20 Eur. L. J. 204–20 (2014).Google Scholar

¹¹² Pringle, CJEU Case C-370/12.Google Scholar

¹¹³ Id. Google Scholar

¹¹⁴ Id. at para. 135.Google Scholar

¹¹⁵ Id. at 116.Google Scholar

¹¹⁶ See supra note 22, Part C with the reference to Hans Peter Ipsen.Google Scholar

¹¹⁷ See, on the defence of the CJEU, Paul Craig, Pringle: Legal Reasoning, Text, Purpose and Teleology, 20 Maastricht J. of Comp. & Eur. L. 3-11, 10 (2013). Craig characterises the Court's reasoning on Art. 15 as “tenuous” and then uses the two authors cited in the text to strengthen the judicial argumentation whereas I feel that they reveal its weaknesses further. Id. at 8.Google Scholar

¹¹⁸ Tuori, Kaarlo Heikki, The European Financial Crisis – Constitutional Aspects and Implications, in EUI Working Paper LAW 2012/28, 34 (Nov. 1, 2012).Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ “[T]he activation of financial assistance by means of a stability mechanism such as the ESM is not compatible with Article 125 TFEU unless it is indispensable for the safeguarding of the financial stability of the euro area as a whole and subject to strict conditions,” Pringle v. Ireland, CJEU Case C-370/12, 2012 E.C.R. I-000, para. 135.Google Scholar

¹²⁰ Everson, Michelle, The Fault of (European) Law in (Political and Social) Economic Crisis, 24 L. & Critique 107 (2013).Google Scholar

¹²¹ View of Advocate General Kokott at paras. 139-140; Pringle, CJEU Case C-370/12.Google Scholar

¹²² Steindorff, Ernst, Politik des Gesetzes als Auslegungsmaßstab im Wirtschaftsrecht, in Festschrift Karl Larenz 217 (1973); Ernst Steindorff, Wirtschaftsordnung und Steuerung durch Privatrecht?, in Festschrift Ludwig Raiser 621 (1974).Google Scholar

¹²³ See generally Beck, Gunnar, The Legal Reasoning of the Court of Justice of the EU (2012).Google Scholar

¹²⁴ See Ioannidis, Michael, EU Financial Assistance Conditionality after “Two Pack”, 74 Heidelberg Journal of International Law (ZaöRV) (forthcoming 2014); Michelle Everson, An Exercise in Legal Honesty: Re-writing the Court of Justice and the Bundesverfassungsgericht, in 136 Political Science Series (Institute for Advanced Studies, Vienna 2014), http://www.ihs.ac.at/publications/pol/pw_136.pdf; [C]onditionality irrevocably undermines the status of the Member States as ‘Masters of the Treaties’ … Just as the Federal Government within Germany respects the democratic integrity of the Länder which make up the federal state, the Federal Republic of Germany cannot, in its relations within the European Union, contract with ‘slaves’. It cannot enter into partnership with anything other than fully sovereign states.Google Scholar

Id. at 30.Google Scholar

¹²⁵ Dyzenhaus, David, The Constitution of Law: Legality in a Time of Emergency 103 (2006).Google Scholar

¹²⁶ Eric Posner and Adrian Vermeule have underlined that they seek to reconstruct Schmitt's work in “generizable social-scientific terms”; see Demystifying Schmitt, (Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 10-47, 2010, Univ. of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 333, 2010) available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1723191.Google Scholar

¹²⁷ An explanatory follow-up to the remarks on Ersatzunionsrecht in Part III.1 above may be in place here. For obvious reasons, Germans are particularly concerned about the lasting impact of Schmitt and another “hour of the executive.” This is by no means to say that the search for administrative legitimacy of European rule as pursued by Peter L. Lindseth (see the references to his work in footnote 143 and his recent Equilibrium, Demoicracy, and Delegation in the Crisis of European Integration, 15 German L.J. (2014) or by Deirdre Curtin (see her Chorley Lecture on The Challenge of Executive Democracy in Europe, 77 Mod. L. Rev. 1, 1-32 (2014) would operate in the shadow of that legacy.Google Scholar

¹²⁸ See Joerges, Christian, The Science of Private Law and the Nation-State 47-82 (Florence: European University Institute, Law Department, Working Paper No. 98/4, 1998); Christian Joerges, Reflections on Habermas' Postnational Constellation, in Jürgen Habermas, Vol. 2 XI-XXI (Camil Ungureanu, Klaus Guenther & Christian Joerges eds., 2011).Google Scholar

¹²⁹ The lecture was published as early as April 1939 in the Institute's series; its 4th edition of 1941 refers to translations into five languages. The quotations in the following are either our own translations of the extremely carefully annotated reprint in Günter Maschke, Carl Schmitt, Staat, Großraum, Nomos. Arbeiten aus den Jahren 1916-1969 269-320 (1995) or, as the title reproduced in this text, Carl Schmitt, Writings on War 75-124 (Timothy Nunan ed. & trans., 2011).Google Scholar

¹³⁰ For more detail on the following, see Christian Joerges, Europe a Großraum? Shifting Legal Conceptualisations of the Integration Project, in Darker Legacies of Law in Europe: The Shadow of National Socialism and Fascism over Europe and its Legal Traditions 167-191 (Christian Joerges & Navraj S. Ghaleigh eds., 2003).Google Scholar

¹³¹ See Schmitt, Carl, Writings on War 110 (Timothy Nunan ed. and trans., 2011). Contemporary reactions attested to how the theory of the Großraum with its “German Monroe doctrine” suited Nazi policy; for this reason, the theory is considered Schmitt's way of indicating his return as a leading legal thinker; see Lothar Gruchmann, Nationalsozialistische Großraumordnung. Die Konstruktion einer “deutschen Monroe-Doktrin” 11 (1962); William E. Scheuerman & Carl Schmitt: The End of Law 161, 169 (1965).Google Scholar

¹³² On the theoretical understanding, but also the determination with which Schmitt championed this claim of leadership, lucidly Hasso Hofmann, Legitimität gegen Legalität. Der Weg der politischen Philosophie Carl Schmitts 215 (1992); later Oliver Eberl, Großraum und Imperium. Die Entwicklung der ‘Völkerrechtlichen Großraumordnung’ aus dem Geiste des totalen Krieges, in Großraum-Denken. Carl Schmitts Kategorie der Großraumordnung 185-206 (Rüdiger Voigt ed., 2008). More complacently, in contrast, see Horst Dreier's appreciation in Wirtschaftsraum – Großraum – Lebensraum. Facetten eines belasteten Begriffs, in Festschrift 600 Jahre Würzburger Juristenfakultät 47, 66-73 (Horst Dreier, Hans Forkel & Klaus Laubenthal eds., 2002).Google Scholar

¹³³ Schmitt, , supra note 131, at 107.Google Scholar

¹³⁴ Koskenniemi, Martti, Constitutionalism as Mindset: Reflections on Kantian Themes About International Law and Globalization, 8 Theoretical Inquiries in L. 9, 16 (2007); Martti Koskenniemi, Miserable Comforters: International Relations as New Natural Law, 15 Euro. J. of Int'l Rel. 395, 411 (2009).Google Scholar

¹³⁵ Schmitt, , supra note 131, at 111; see John P. McCormick, Carl Schmitt's Critique of Liberalism. Against Politics as technology 42-46, 92-105 (1997) (noting the technicity).Google Scholar

¹³⁶ Infamous and important, Carl Schmitt, Starker Staat und gesunde Wirtschaft. Ein Vortrag vor Wirtschaftsführern (delivered on Nov. 23, 1932), 2 Volk und Reich 81-94 (1933).Google Scholar

¹³⁷ The preliminary remarks to the 4th edition (Berlin 1941) include the famous motto: “We are like mariners on a continuing journey, and no book can be more than a log book.”Google Scholar

¹³⁸ Schmitt, Carl, Der Nomos der Erde im Völkerrecht des Jus Publicum Europaeum (1950); Carl Schmitt, The Nomos of the Earth in the International Law of the Jus Publicum Europaeum (G.L. Ulmen trans., Telos Press 2003).Google Scholar

¹³⁹ Schmitt, Carl, Die legale Weltrevolution. Politischer Mehrwert als Prämie auf juristische Legalität und Superlegalität, in 17 Der Staat 321-339 (1978). In this tribute to the French economic theorist François Perroux, who examined apparently related economic dimensions of space, we read at 328:Google Scholar

Today, the issue is about the political system for society adequate in relation to scientific-technical-industrial developments. Today, the adage cujus industria, ejus regio or cujus regio, ejus industria applies“, and on the following page Schmitt went on: ”The industrialised society is bound to rationalisation, including the transformation of law into legality.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁰ Schmitt, Carl, Vergleichender Überblick über die neueste Entwicklung des Problems gesetzgeberischer Ermächtigungen (legislative Delegationen), 6 Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 252-288 (1938); on this, of course under the impression of the American understanding of the executive, see Peter L. Lindseth, Power and Legitimacy: Reconciling Europe and the Nation-State 62 (2010). Lindseth has underlined the importance and topicality of this aspect of Schmitt's work already in his essay, Peter L. Lindseth, The Paradox of Parliamentary Supremacy: Delegation, Democracy and Dictatorship in Germany and France, 1920s–1950s, 113 Yale L.J., 1343, 1354, 1382 (2004).Google Scholar

¹⁴¹ McCormick, John P., Carl Schmitt's Critique of Liberalism. Against Politics as technology 122–156 (1997); Ellen Kennedy, Emergency Government Within the Bounds of the Constitution: An Introduction to Carl Schmitt, ‘The Dictatorship of the Reich president according to Article 48 R.V.,' 18 Constellations 284–297 (2011).Google Scholar

¹⁴² Schmitt, Carl, Die Diktatur. Von den Anfängen des modernen Souveränitätsgedankens bis zum proletarischen Klassenkampf [1921] (1989). As examples of the copious literature compare the explanations in Hasso Hofmann, Legitimität gegen Legalität. Der Weg der politischen Philosophie Carl Schmitts (1992).Google Scholar

¹⁴³ Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde, Kennt die europäische Not kein Gebot? Die Webfehler der EU und die Notwendigkeit einer neuen politischen Entscheidung, Neue Züricher Zeitung, June 21, 2010; also Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde, Wissenschaft, Politik, Verfassungsgericht, in 67 JuristenZeitung 197 (2012).Google Scholar

¹⁴⁴ Hufeld, Ulrich, Zwischen Notrettung und Rütlischwur: der Umbau der Wirtschafts- und Währungsunion in der Krise, 34 Integration 117, 122 (2011).Google Scholar

¹⁴⁵ Schmitt, Carl, Verfassungslehre 107 (1928) (this author's translation, 2010).Google Scholar

¹⁴⁶ Schorkopf, Frank, Gestaltung mit Recht – Prägekraft und Selbststand des Rechts in einer Rechtsgemeinschaft, 136 Archiv des öffentlichen Rechts 136, 323, 341 (2011); Frank Schorkopf, Finanzkrisen als Herausforderung der internationalen, europäischen und nationalen Rechtssetzung, 71 Veröffentlichungen der Vereinigung der Deutschen Staatsrechtslehrer 183 (2012).Google Scholar

¹⁴⁷ Id. at 225.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁸ Kaiser, Anna-Bettina, Die Verantwortung der Staatsrechtslehre in Krisenzeiten – Art. 48 WRV im Spiegel der Staatsrechtslehrertagung und des Deutschen Juristentages 1924, in Zur Aktualität der Weimarer Staatsrechtslehre 119–142 (Ulrich Jan Schröder & Antje V. Ungern-Sternberg eds., 2011).Google Scholar

¹⁴⁹ Id. at 140.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁰ See supra Parts D.III & D.IV.Google Scholar

¹⁵¹ Posner, Eric A. & Vermeule, Adrian, The Executive Unbound. After the Madisonian Republic 8 (2010): “When emergencies occur, legislatures acting under real constraints of time, expertise, and institutional energy typically face the choice between doing nothing at all or delegating new powers to the executive to manage the crisis.” This book is riddled with such pronouncements; on this, see Nadia Urbinati, Democracy Disfigured: Opinion, Truth, and the People 171–227 (2012); for a critical discussion of the empirical dimensions and claims of The Executive Unbound, see Aziz Z. Huq, Binding the Executive (by Law or by Politics), 79 U. Chi. L. Rev. 777 (2012). In an earlier essay, Posner and Vermeule have underlined that they seek to re-construct Schmitt's work in “generizable social-scientific terms”; see Posner & Vermeule, supra note 126. I am by no means the only one to underline, and to relativize, the topicality of Schmittian notions in the present state of the European project: “Without a modicum of legitimacy derived from any European treaties, the austerity dictates of the Troika (comprised of the EU, the ECB, and the IMF) have insinuated themselves as the sovereign acts in the distinctly Schmittian sense of the term, i.e., as extra-legal decisions on the exception.” Id. Thus, Michael Marder, Carl Schmitt and the De-Constitutionalisation of Europe, contribution to Conference on “Europe after the Euro-crisis: Legitimacy, Democracy and Justice, organised by the Institute for Democratic Governance, Bilbao, September 2–3, 2013 (ms. on file with the author).Google Scholar

¹⁵² Schmitt, Carl, Die Wendung zum totalen Staat (The turn to the total state), reprinted in Carl Schmitt: Positionen und Begriffe im Kampf mit Weimar-Genf-Versailles, 1923-1939, 146-153 (1988) (quoted according the the reprint). On this see also Carl Schmitt, Der Hüter der Verfassung 78 (1969); on this William E. Scheuerman, Carl Schmitt: The End of Law 85 (1965).Google Scholar

¹⁵³ Schmitt, Carl, Die legale Weltrevolution. Politischer Mehrwert als Prämie auf juristische Legalität und Superlegalität, 17 Der Staat 335 (1978).Google Scholar

¹⁵⁴ Italics are use for German terms and a book title Italics added. On the recourse to the duality of legality and legitimacy in the present context, see Reinhard Mehring, Der ‘Nomos’ nach 1945 bei Carl Schmitt und Jürgen Habermas, in Forum historiae iuris, paras. 20-26.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁵ On the theory of the Rechtsstaat, see Ingeborg Maus, Rechtstheorie und Politische Theorie im Industriekapitalismus 40 (1986). Schmitt's differentiation of the categories of “formal” and “political” concepts of law and legislation, see Carl Schmitt, Verfassungslehre 143 (1928) (reprinted in 2010), between the generality of laws and the concrete political act of will, leads him to executive and governmental law-making in the Carl Schmitt, Vergleichender Überblick über die neueste Entwicklung des Problems gesetzgeberischer Ermächtigungen (legislative Delegationen), 6 Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 252 (1938); see Hasso Hofmann, Legitimität gegen Legalität. Der Weg der politischen Philosophie Carl Schmitts 83 (1992).Google Scholar

¹⁵⁶ Schmitt, Carl, Verfassungslehre 223 (1928) (reprinted in 2010); see Ulrich K. Preuß, Die Weimarer Republik - ein Laboratorium für neues verfassungsrechtliches Denken, in Metamorphosen des Politischen: Grundfragen politischer Einheitsbildung seit den 20er Jahren 177, 180. (Andreas Göbel ed., 1995).Google Scholar

¹⁵⁷ This exploration is no contribution to the les-extrêmes-se-touchent debate around the relationship of Habermas to Schmitt [for an attempt to update it, see Ernst Vollrath, Proteus und Medusa. Die politische Apperzeption der deutschen Staatsrechtslehre im Werk von Jürgen Habermas, 37 Politische Vierteljahresschrift 197 (1996); see also Reinhard Mehring, Der ‘Nomos’ nach 1945 bei Carl Schmitt und Jürgen Habermas, in Forum historiae iuris, para. 26.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁸ See e.g., Rettet die Würde der Demokratie, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Nov. 4, 2011. A number of these statements are reprinted in Jürgen Habermas, Zur Verfassung Europas: Ein Essay 97-129 (2011); a more recent example can be found in his essay in Le Monde of Oct. 27, 2011 (English version available at http://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/article/1106741-juergen-habermas-democracy-stake). Habermas' entire work is comprehensively documented and updated weekly in the Habermas Forum: http://www.habermasforum.dk, the most recent being, Jürgen Habermas, Merkel's European Failure: Germany Dozes on a Volcano, in Der Spiegel, 5 (July 2013). A great number of his pertinent essays haverecently been reprinted in the Journal Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik 3/2014, 85–416 under the title Drer Aufklärer Jürgen Habermas at the occasion of his 85^th birthday on June 18, 2014. They can be downloaded freely at http://habermas-rawls.blogspot.dk/2014/06/e-book-der-aufklarer-jurgen-habermas.html.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁹ See Habermas, Jürgen, A Pact for or against Europe? in What does Germany Think about Europe? 83–89 (Ulrike Guérot & Jacqueline Hénard eds., 2011).Google Scholar

¹⁶⁰ Habermas, Jürgen, Citizenship and National Identity, in Staatsbürgerschaft und nationale Identität (1991), reprinted in Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy 491–516 (1999).Google Scholar

¹⁶¹ Id. In German: Faktizität und Geltung. Beiträge zur Diskurstheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtsstaats (1992).Google Scholar

¹⁶² For a reconstruction of Habermas' works, which, however, seeks to (re-) interpret the author for his own ends, see Christian Joerges, Reflections on Habermas' Postnational Constellation, in Jürgen Habermas, Vol. 2 XI–XXI (Camil Ungureanu, Klaus Guenther & Christian Joerges eds., 2011).Google Scholar

¹⁶³ Habermas, Jürgen, The Crisis of the European Union in the Light of a Constitutionalization of International Law, 23 Euro. J. of Int'l L. 335, 335-348 (2012). One can no longer be sure about the seriousness of this distinction. In the preface to his most recent book, Jürgen Habermas, Im Sog der Technokratie. Kleine Politische Schriften XII 8 n. 2 (2013), Habermas expresses some discontent with the fact that his public interventions did not make it into the general academic discourses.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁴ Pringle, CJEU Case C-370/12 at para. 296.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁵ See, e.g., Jürgen Habermas, Bringing the Integration of Citizens into Line with the Integration of States, 18 Euro. L. J. 485, 487 (2012).Google Scholar

¹⁶⁶ See Armin von Bogdandy, Basic Principles, in Principles of European Constitutional Law 13, 44 (Armin von Bogdandy & Jürgen Bast eds., 2010); Claudio Franzius, Europäisches Verfassungsdenken 49 (2010); Claudio Franzius & Ulrich K, Preuß, Die Zukunft der Europäischen Demokratie 33 (2012).Google Scholar

¹⁶⁷ See Nicole Scicluna, EU Constitutionalism in the Twenty-first Century: Politics and Law in Crisis 101 (2013) (unpublished Ph.D Thesis, La Trobe University):Google Scholar

So far it has proved difficult, if not impossible, to have a full and inclusive debate on the lofty ideal of ‘political union’ while the Eurozone crisis is still in its emergency phase. As long as this state of emergency persists, European politicians and officials will continue to be heavily focused on the pragmatic, day-to-day steps that (in their opinions) are necessary to save it.Google Scholar

See also Nicole Scicluna, EU constitutionalism in flux? Is the Eurozone crisis precipitating centralisation or diffusion?, 18 Euro. L. J. 489, 500 (2012).Google Scholar

¹⁶⁸ McCormick, John P., Carl Schmitt's Europe: Cultural, Imperial and Spatial, Proposals for European Integration, 1923-1955, in Darker Legacies of L. in Euro. 133, 141 (Christian Joerges & Navraj S. Ghaleigh eds., 2003).Google Scholar

¹⁶⁹ The contrast between Verfassungsrecht (constitutional law) and Verfassungsswirklichkeit (constitutional reality) is another problematical German legacy—again with root in Carl Schmitt, Verfassungslehre 107 (1928) (reprinted in 2010).Google Scholar

¹⁷⁰ Habermas, Jürgen, A Pact for or against Europe?, in What does Germany Think about Europe? 83–89 (Ulrike Guérot & Jacqueline Hénard eds., 2011).Google Scholar

¹⁷¹ Chalmers, Damian, The European Redistributive State and the Need for a European Law of Struggle, 18 European Law Journal 667 (2012) and Damian Chalmers, European Restatements of Sovereignty, (LSE Working Paper No. 10, 2013).Google Scholar

¹⁷² Streeck, Wolfgang, Buying Time: The Delayed Crisis of Democratic Capitalism 97–164 (2014).Google Scholar

¹⁷³ Christian Joerges and Maria Weimer, A Crisis of Executive Managerialism in the EU: No Alternative? (2012).Google Scholar

¹⁷⁴ Scharpf, Fritz W., Political Legitimacy in a Non-optimal Currency Area, in Adjusting to European Diversity: Adjusting to European Diversity: The End of the Eurocrats' Dream (Damian Chalmers, Markus Jachtenfuchs & Christian Joerges eds. (forthcoming 2015).Google Scholar

¹⁷⁵ Curtin, Deirdre, The Challenge of Executive Democracy in Europe, 77 Modern L. Rev. 1, 1–32 (2014).Google Scholar

¹⁷⁶ Hans-Jürgen Bieling, Das Projekt der Euro-Rettung und die Widersprüche des europäischen Krisenkonstitutionalismus, 20 Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen 89, 89–103 (2013).Google Scholar

¹⁷⁷ For a critique of the European “political culture of total optimism” and its weak underpinnings, see Giandomenico Majone, Rethinking the Union of Europe Post-crisis. Has Integration Gone Too Far? 74–80 (2014).Google Scholar

¹⁷⁸ Friedrich A. von Hayek, Nobel Memorial Lecture (Dec. 11, 1974), http://pavroz.ru/files/hayekpretence.pdf.Google Scholar

¹⁷⁹ This is why law should not be called the culprit here; but see K.A. Armstrong, New Governance and the European Union: An Empirical and Conceptual Critique, in Critical Legal Perspectives on Global Governance: Liber Amicorum David M Trubek n. 10 and accompanying text (Gráínne de Búrca, Claire Kilpatrick & Joanne Scott eds., 2013), http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2244762-.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁰ See Everson, Michelle, A very cosmopolitan citizenship; but who pays the price? in Michael Dougan, Niamh Nic Shuibhne and Eleanor Spaventa, Empowerment and Disempowerment of the European Citizen 145 (2013).Google Scholar

¹⁸¹ Giubboni, Stefano, European citizenship, labour law and social rights in times of crisis?, this GLJ Special Issue.Google Scholar

¹⁸² It is worth noting that very similar disappointments are also becoming a concern in the accession states; see for an instructive analysis Bojan Bugaric, Europe Against the Left? On Legal Limits to Progressive Politics (LEQS Paper No. 61, 2013).Google Scholar

¹⁸³ Hölderlin, Friedrich, note 9 supra. Google Scholar

¹⁸⁴ For a thorough reconstruction see Beate Braams, Koordinierung als Kompetenzkategorie 15–49 (2013).Google Scholar

¹⁸⁵ See supra notes 31 & 33. For an evaluation see the contributions in Conflicts Law as Constitutional Form in the Postnational Constellation, 2:2 Transnational Legal Theory (Christian Joerges, Poul F. Kjaer & Tommi Ralli eds., 2011). The core premises of the approach are explained in the introductory chapter by the three editors on “A New Type of Conflicts Law as Constitutional Form in the Postnational Constellation,” 153–165.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁶ Draft European Constitutional Treaty arts. 1–8 (Dec. 16, 2004).Google Scholar

¹⁸⁷ It seems worth noting that Habermas expresses the same ideas in his recent work on the constitutionalisation of international law:Google Scholar

Nation-states … encumber each other with the external effects of decisions that impinge on third parties who had no say in the decision-making process. Hence, states cannot escape the need for regulation and coordination in the expanding horizon of a world society that is increasingly self-programming, even at the cultural level.Google Scholar

See Jürgen Habermas Does the Contitutionalization of International Law still have a Chance?, in Jürgen Habermas, The Divided West 113, 176 (Ciaran Cronin trans., 2007).Google Scholar

¹⁸⁸ See Joerges, Christian, Poul F. Kjaer & Tommi Ralli A New Type of Conflicts Law as Constitutional Form in the Postnational Constellation, in Conflicts Law as Constitutional Form in the Postnational Constellation, 2:2 Transnational Legal Theory 159–160.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁹ See supra notes 73, 76.Google Scholar

¹⁹⁰ See Joerges, Christian & Weimer, Maria, A Crisis of Executive Managerialism in the EU: No Alternative?, in Critical Legal Perspectives on Global Governance: Liber Amicorum David M Trubek 295 (Gráínne de Búrca, Claire Kilpatrick & Joanne Scott eds., 2013).Google Scholar