Is the Court of Justice of the EU more Europeanist than Member State governments?

No, because it strictly applies the laws Member States have previously approved.
8% (7 votes)
No, because Member States have retained the power to appoint and re-appoint judges.
3% (3 votes)
Yes, because of its institutional design, it has been able to push integration forward when governments have been unable to.
86% (78 votes)
Yes, because of judicial drift, which has fuelled the kind of Euroscepticism that led to Brexit.
3% (3 votes)
Total votes: 91

Comments

I choose answer number 3. Court of Justice is a necessary organism to help EU integration. Is not loved by all members, but offer solutions which are applied in all union. New members from eastern countries need this because their laws suffer from communist vision. Old ones need it because they have many ancient laws which are not compatible with a new and integrated market. Some formers empires are against this unity with countries with same rights, and now Brexit becomes one phenomenon where the UK claim his market and rules outside Europe. Brexit activists show only costs for the UK and determine citizens to vote according to this.
Total votes: 19
Peer vote

Is the Court of Justice of the EU more Europeanist than Member State governments? I would say yes, and it has been ready to push European integration forward when governments have been unable to. There is a difference between European countries' policy and economy but the Court of Justice fulfils this gap in a way of interchangeable principles and its adjustment to individual states' law. It covers a lot of spheres, for example, airpassengers rights, Google, medical treatment, trade marks, competition law, agriculture, antiterroristic legislation and sanctions throughout two main institutions: Cour of Justice and General Court. That is why i see visible need of existence of the Court of Justice on the vast of the EU.
Total votes: 12
Peer vote

I believe that the Court of Justice of the EU is more prudent than national courts and it can push European integration forward. The Court of Justice of the EU brought together the best laws of different countries. But such a loyalty to the views of the Court of Justice of the EU can lead to an increase in Euroscepticism and destructive processes. The Court of Justice of the EU is an important part of the EU, which is equally regulated in different countries and national courts can take an example from Court of Justice of the EU.
Total votes: 9
Peer vote

As far as I am concerned the Court of Justice of the EU is Supreme one because it was arranged to be like that. All the member states sacrificed a part of their national legislation or changed it for the betterment and complete integration in the EU. They decided to set up the institution that, irrespective of a little bit subjective national legislation, would be able to make equitable and fair decisions that wouldn't violate the individuals interests of both sides. According to this weekend can make a conclusion that The Court of Justice of the EU ensures the observance of the right and freedoms of Europeans irrespective of anything, that's which it is more Europeanist.
Total votes: 13
Peer vote

The European Court of Justice is the judicial institution of the European Union. The ECJ upholds the Treaties and ensures that European law is interpreted and applied in the same way across the EU through various forms of legal action. It decides whether the institutions of the EU are acting legally, and it settles disputes between them.It ensures that the member states of the EU are complying with their legal obligations as set out in the EU treaties; and it allows member states to challenge EU legislation.It interprets EU law at the request of national courts. Taken all together, this means that the ECJ interprets and enforces the rules of the single market, and pretty much everything else that the EU does. First thing that one need to notice, while pondering upon ECJ role in process of European integration, is that during its existence the Court expanded its jurisdiction in several areas which held important meaning for political integration. Nowadays, European Union as a international actor, and each of the member states need to face the need to make another steps into further integration, while relinquishing more sensitive areas of national control. There should be no doubt that European Court of Justice is a pro-integrative institution.
Total votes: 12
Peer vote

The EU court is conceived as an independent body. This is ensured by a relatively long service life, a formal independence from Member States. The EU Court is the highest judicial body in the European Union, which aims to ensure the rule of law when interpreting and applying the provisions of the EU TreatyThe EU court is also empowered to draw conclusions on the compatibility of international agreements concluded between the EU, the court is an incentive to fulfill obligations. Performs a large range of functions that gives him a honorable place in the European Union.
Total votes: 15
Peer vote

I consider that the Court of Justice of the EU is more Europeanist than national courts. First of all, it should be noted that his duties are: reviewing the legality of actions taken by the EU's institutions; enforcing compliance by member states with their obligations under the Treaties, and interpreting European Union law. In addition, it seems to me that The Court of Justice of the EU can contribute to European integration Moreover, It includes certain parts of the national legislation of the member countries, that's why this court is more Europeanist.
Total votes: 15
Peer vote

Curtea Europeana de Justitie reprezinta instanta supreuma a Uniunii Europene. Curtea de Justiție reprezinta un organism necesar, ce ajuta si faciliteaza integrarea în UE. Solutiile si propunerile acesteia nu sunt apreciate si acceptate cu usurinta de catre toti membrii, insa aceasta ofera solutii plauzibile si aplicabile la nivelul uniunii, prin interpretarea corecta a legislatiei si aplicarea ei in mod egal in toate statele membre. Ideea care sta la baza legislatiei Uniunii este ca fiecare stat trebuie sa integreze in propria legislatie, principiile prevazute de legislatia UE. In mod clar prin structura sa, Curtea de Justitie este prudenta, comparative cu organelle de justitie ale fiecarui stat, impulsionand astfel procesul de integrare la nivelul UE al statelor.
Total votes: 13
Peer vote

In my opinion the ECJ has the important function of upholding the treaties that govern the EU and ensuring that the European Union Law is interpreted and applied in the same way across Europe by allowing different court proceedings. It is possible to argue that if the EU didn’t have a strong Court which is actually the institution that makes the EU law work, or without the principles of direct effect and supremacy laid down by the Court, the Member States would act according to their national legislation. This could have an important impact on the functioning of EU key policies and it can affect mainly the single market which will not work properly. Any Member State would be able to protect its own national market by passing national laws that contradict the single market law. This will be a source of state protectionism and discrimination.
Total votes: 14
Peer vote

CJUE este o instituție mult mai europenistă decât Consiliu, deși judecătorii sunt desemnaţi de guvernele statelor membre. Aici observăm problema principal-agent care are riscul de derapaj judiciar, însă acest concept nu explică în totalitate ipoteza că Curtea este mai europenistă. Judecătorii sunt delegați,dar aceștia trebuie să se pronunțe în totală independență de guvernele statelor membre(având uneori și propriile interese) De altfel, Curtea are o mai mare putere, deoarece judecătorii nu au voie să divulge modul în care s-a votat. Un alt argument privește faptul că aceasta a impulsionat procesul de integrare europeană. Dintre cele mai importante principii dezvoltate de Curte, se numără : principiul supremaţiei dreptului comunitar asupra dreptului intern( prin speța Costa vs Enel), principiul efectul direct al unor dispoziţii comunitare (prin speța Van Gend en Loss). Totodată, CJUE are o putere mai mare asupra interpretării tratatelor, deoarece exista incertitudine și tratatele sunt incomplete, iar judecătorul comunitar se confruntă cu un sistem de drept în formare. Astfel că, CJUE prin acoperirea unor lacune legislative a creat, principii de bază ale dreptului comunitar,ceea ce a condus spre o mai buna integrare europeană.Un alt motiv pentru care Curtea este mai europenistă, are în vedere urmărirea îndeplinirii obiectivelor UE, prin înființarea Pieții Comune, care impune aplicarea uniformă a dreptului UE în statele membre, fără de care nu se produce integrarea. Introducerea conceptului juridic de cetățenie europeană a întâmpinat inițial un vad de scepticism, astfel că, Curtea a fost cea care a susținut că această cetățenie este destinată să continue statutul fundamental al resortisanților statelor membre. Tot CJUE este cea care a decis ca prevederile privind cetățenia europeană sunt cele care au impulsionat spre o mai bună integrare,deoare au extins avantajele sociale( acces la asistență socială pentru muncitori și studenți). Dovada empirică ne arată ca guvernele statelor membre sunt uneori nemulțumite de deciziile Curții. Deși a fost invocată jurisdicția Curții ca un motiv pentru Brexit, articolul realizat de Institute for Government, intitulat Who's afraid of the ECJ? ne arată că Marea Britanie a câștigat aproximativ un sfert din toate cazurile împotriva Curții și că cele mai multe decizii vin contra statelor mari ca Italia, Germania, Franța.( https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/IfG_Brexit_ECJ_v10FINAL%20web.pdf)
Total votes: 17
Peer vote