EU constitutionalisation revisited: Redressing a central assumption in European studies

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Standard

EU constitutionalisation revisited : Redressing a central assumption in European studies. / Rasmussen, Morten; Martinsen, Dorte Sindbjerg.

In: European Law Journal, Vol. 25, No. 3, 01.01.2019, p. 251-272.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Rasmussen, M & Martinsen, DS 2019, 'EU constitutionalisation revisited: Redressing a central assumption in European studies', European Law Journal, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 251-272. https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12317

APA

Rasmussen, M., & Martinsen, D. S. (2019). EU constitutionalisation revisited: Redressing a central assumption in European studies. European Law Journal, 25(3), 251-272. https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12317

Vancouver

Rasmussen M, Martinsen DS. EU constitutionalisation revisited: Redressing a central assumption in European studies. European Law Journal. 2019 Jan 1;25(3): 251-272. https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12317

Author

Rasmussen, Morten ; Martinsen, Dorte Sindbjerg. / EU constitutionalisation revisited : Redressing a central assumption in European studies. In: European Law Journal. 2019 ; Vol. 25, No. 3. pp. 251-272.

Bibtex

@article{ba88482e424440de836afe67de8a89ec,
title = "EU constitutionalisation revisited: Redressing a central assumption in European studies",
abstract = "The constitutionalisation of the European Union has since the early 1990s become a truism in European studies. This article revisits the constitutionalisation theory drawing on the insights from emerging historical research and new strands of political science research. We find that the conventional constitutional narrative is less convincing when confronted with the new evidence from historical and political science research. New historical research show that Member State governments, administrations and courts have generally been rather reluctant to embrace the constitutional project of the ECJ. Furthermore, at the level of European politics, the ECJ and its case law have far from judicialized European decision-making to the extent often claimed. Concluding, we reject the notion that the ECJ has successfully constitutionalised the EU, emphasising instead the inherent tensions in the process, which continue to complicate the efficiency of European law.",
author = "Morten Rasmussen and Martinsen, {Dorte Sindbjerg}",
year = "2019",
month = jan,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/eulj.12317",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = " 251--272",
journal = "European Law Journal",
issn = "1351-5993",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - EU constitutionalisation revisited

T2 - Redressing a central assumption in European studies

AU - Rasmussen, Morten

AU - Martinsen, Dorte Sindbjerg

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - The constitutionalisation of the European Union has since the early 1990s become a truism in European studies. This article revisits the constitutionalisation theory drawing on the insights from emerging historical research and new strands of political science research. We find that the conventional constitutional narrative is less convincing when confronted with the new evidence from historical and political science research. New historical research show that Member State governments, administrations and courts have generally been rather reluctant to embrace the constitutional project of the ECJ. Furthermore, at the level of European politics, the ECJ and its case law have far from judicialized European decision-making to the extent often claimed. Concluding, we reject the notion that the ECJ has successfully constitutionalised the EU, emphasising instead the inherent tensions in the process, which continue to complicate the efficiency of European law.

AB - The constitutionalisation of the European Union has since the early 1990s become a truism in European studies. This article revisits the constitutionalisation theory drawing on the insights from emerging historical research and new strands of political science research. We find that the conventional constitutional narrative is less convincing when confronted with the new evidence from historical and political science research. New historical research show that Member State governments, administrations and courts have generally been rather reluctant to embrace the constitutional project of the ECJ. Furthermore, at the level of European politics, the ECJ and its case law have far from judicialized European decision-making to the extent often claimed. Concluding, we reject the notion that the ECJ has successfully constitutionalised the EU, emphasising instead the inherent tensions in the process, which continue to complicate the efficiency of European law.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064661385&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/eulj.12317

DO - 10.1111/eulj.12317

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:85064661385

VL - 25

SP - 251

EP - 272

JO - European Law Journal

JF - European Law Journal

SN - 1351-5993

IS - 3

ER -

ID: 218002944