How a Paradoxical Protection of Democracy Can Fade Away: On the Erosion of the German Lisbon Judgment’s Authority

Abstract This paper revisits the German Constitutional Court’s Lisbon judgment (2009) and its restrictive stance towards European integration. It argues that the judgment’s reasoning was problematic from the outset and has become increasingly untenable in view of current geopolitical and domestic challenges. In light of subsequent political and legal developments, the judgment’s authority has significantly eroded. In practice, German policy and the Court itself have already moved beyond the rigid constraints suggested by the Lisbon judgment, with major integrative decisions advancing into areas the Court had sought to block. The article shows paths to a recalibration of the Court’s restrictive jurisprudence, building on the more integration-friendly line developed by its First Senate. Thus, it situates German constitutional law more constructively within the European constitutional order.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Hague Journal on the Rule of Law
Published
2026-01-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-025-00266-3
Primary Topic
European Union Policy and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How a Paradoxical Protection of Democracy Can Fade Away: On the Erosion of the German Lisbon Judgment’s Authority

Armin von Bogdandy
Hague Journal on the Rule of Law
European Union Policy and Governance
article

How a Paradoxical Protection of Democracy Can Fade Away: On the Erosion of the German Lisbon Judgment’s Authority

Armin von Bogdandy
article en

Abstract

Abstract This paper revisits the German Constitutional Court’s Lisbon judgment (2009) and its restrictive stance towards European integration. It argues that the judgment’s reasoning was problematic from the outset and has become increasingly untenable in view of current geopolitical and domestic challenges. In light of subsequent political and legal developments, the judgment’s authority has significantly eroded. In practice, German policy and the Court itself have already moved beyond the rigid constraints suggested by the Lisbon judgment, with major integrative decisions advancing into areas the Court had sought to block. The article shows paths to a recalibration of the Court’s restrictive jurisprudence, building on the more integration-friendly line developed by its First Senate. Thus, it situates German constitutional law more constructively within the European constitutional order.

Hague Journal on the Rule of Law
Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law (DE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 97%
European Union Policy and Governance
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

How a Paradoxical Protection of Democracy Can Fade Away: On the Erosion of the German Lisbon Judgment’s Authority — Armin von Bogdandy · Hague Journal on the Rule of Law (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS