Does ideology trump geography? Political divides and MEP responses to democratic backsliding

Abstract Multiple rounds of European Union (EU) enlargement and the rise of the populist radical right have affected the organisation of political competition in the European Parliament (EP). This study probes how the EU’s efforts to redress democratic backsliding in several EU member states crystallise deepening divides between European lawmakers. Our empirical analysis examines 17 roll-call votes on rule of law issues and well over 900 discursive statements from corresponding parliamentary debates held between 2009 and 2019. Our unique approach enables us to analyse discursive and voting patterns both separately and jointly to understand how they affect each other. We find that behaviour across these different arenas is generally consistent and aligns with an ideological divide that pits Eurosceptic Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) against representatives from pro-EU European party groups. Once we account for ideological orientations and strategic motivations, the often-claimed East–West divide on rule of law issues becomes much less salient, emerging primarily under specific conditions of ongoing democratic erosion and national incumbency in Central and Eastern Europe. Our findings speak to the literature on EU responses to democratic backsliding as well as to the changing dynamics of political competition in the EU more broadly.