CONSTITUTIONAL ADAPTATION TO EUROPEAN INTEGRATION: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE ROMANIAN AND SPANISH LEGAL FRAMEWORKS AS EU MEMBER STATES

This paper undertakes a comparative analysis of the constitutional adaptations of Romania and Spain to European Union membership, examining the distinct legal frameworks established through art. 148 of the Romanian Constitution and art. 93 of the Spanish Constitution (SC), respectively. Despite sharing a civil law tradition, their different historical trajectories towards and within the EU have shaped divergent approaches to integrating supranational law. The study contrasts the CCR's assertion of the Constitution's absolute supremacy over EU law, limiting primacy to infra-constitutional norms and leading to direct jurisprudential challenges to the CJEU, with the Spanish Constitutional Court's doctrine distinguishing constitutional supremacy from the primacy of application of EU law within ceded competences, allowing for greater accommodation while reserving ultimate constitutional safeguards based on „fundamental structures”. It explores the differing roles these courts play as guardians or gatekeepers, their varying engagement in judicial dialogue, and their distinct operationalization of „constitutional identity” – linked to Romania's unamendable provisions versus Spain's fundamental structures – as a limit to integration. The analysis highlights how these contrasting judicial philosophies and interpretations result in different strategies for balancing national sovereignty with EU obligations