International and European judicialisation increasingly affect even those policy areas which were considered an exclusive national competence for a long time. Court-driven integration is particularly strong in the European Union (EU), because member states cannot control which cases reach the courts and because joint political decisions to correct the case law are rare. Case law that is developed and accepted for the freedom of goods, however, raises controversies when it is transferred to services or worker mobility. Political issues essential for national autonomy arise

This project analyses how national governments explore the limits of their regulatory autonomy from a political science perspective. Turning compliance research upside-down, we ask:

• Through which strategies and under what conditions can EU member states still pursue autonomous regulatory goals without conflicting with European law?

Often, European jurisprudence defines a legal corridor which allows member state governments to defend national regulatory goals in community-compatible ways. However, policy-makers then face a trade-off whether to partly give up regulatory autonomy in order to increase legal certainty.

Empirically, the project studies the legislative responses of EU member states challenged – directly or indirectly – to regulate autonomously by the jurisprudence of the ECJ. As points of departure, seven series of ECJ rulings were chosen with respect to the free movement of services, persons, enterprises and capital.

Project result
Schmidt, Susanne K.; Kelemen, R. Daniel (Hg.) (2012): Perpetual momentum? Reconsidering the power of the European Court of Justice, Journal of European Public Policy, Special Issue,19(1)

Download
Final report 2015 in German
Project application 2011-2014 in German
Project application 2008-2010 in German