How EU Member States Represent the Common Purpose of Migration Management: Nijhoff Studies in European Union Law, cartea 26
Autor Sebastian Meyeren Limba Engleză Hardback – 28 noi 2024
Din seria Nijhoff Studies in European Union Law
- 18%
Preț: 842.33 lei - 18%
Preț: 871.61 lei - 18%
Preț: 748.40 lei - 18%
Preț: 926.79 lei - 18%
Preț: 812.95 lei - 18%
Preț: 961.38 lei - 18%
Preț: 971.28 lei - 18%
Preț: 852.63 lei - 18%
Preț: 763.04 lei - 18%
Preț: 1185.49 lei - 18%
Preț: 832.85 lei - 18%
Preț: 1056.86 lei - 18%
Preț: 963.05 lei - 18%
Preț: 1035.90 lei - 18%
Preț: 712.64 lei - 18%
Preț: 1028.73 lei - 18%
Preț: 857.58 lei - 18%
Preț: 985.54 lei
Preț: 914.64 lei
Preț vechi: 1115.43 lei
-18% Nou
Puncte Express: 1372
Preț estimativ în valută:
175.10€ • 182.01$ • 145.18£
175.10€ • 182.01$ • 145.18£
Carte disponibilă
Livrare economică 17-22 ianuarie 25
Preluare comenzi: 021 569.72.76
Specificații
ISBN-13: 9789004695726
ISBN-10: 9004695729
Pagini: 300
Dimensiuni: 155 x 235 mm
Greutate: 0 kg
Editura: Brill
Colecția Brill | Nijhoff
Seria Nijhoff Studies in European Union Law
ISBN-10: 9004695729
Pagini: 300
Dimensiuni: 155 x 235 mm
Greutate: 0 kg
Editura: Brill
Colecția Brill | Nijhoff
Seria Nijhoff Studies in European Union Law
Notă biografică
Sebastian Meyer was a postdoctoral researcher at the Utrecht Centre for Regulation and Enforcement in Europe (Renforce), doing research on EU constitutional law and EU migration management. He holds a Ph.D. from the University of Basel, where he worked as an academic assistant at the Chair of European Law.
Cuprins
Introduction
Part 1
1Representing the Union and the Nation State
1 Introduction
2 Representing the Nation State
2.1Political Reflexivity in the Constitutional State
2.2How the German Federal Constitutional Court Represents European Integration
3 Representing the Rechtsgemeinschaft: The Common Purpose of Mutual Non-interference
4 Representation, EU Law and the Empowerment of the Member States
4.1What Makes a (Good) Representative?
4.2What Makes Member States (Good) Representatives of the Union?
4.3How the Formal Representation of the Union May Become Contentious
5 Conclusion
2Acting on Behalf of the Common Purpose
1 Introduction
2 Moving between the Spheres (i): The Systemic Dimension
2.1Radical Pluralism: Each to Their Own
2.2Cosmopolitan Pluralism: Principles Anywhere
2.3Epistemic Pluralism: The Elusive Common Whole
2.4Synthesis: The Common Purpose in Constitutional Pluralism
3 The Principle of Autonomy in EU Law: Meaning and Limits
3.1The Original Justification
3.2Today: Upholding the Common Values and Mutual Trust
3.3Interim Conclusion
4 Solidarity and the Common Purpose of Migration Management
4.1The Concept of Solidarity
4.2Solidarity in the Inner Sphere
4.3Solidarity in the Intermediate Sphere
5 Moving between the Spheres (ii): The Instrumental Dimension
5.1The Relationship between Law and Governance
5.2Political Hybridity as Part of the Meta-constitutional Discourse
6 Conclusion
Part 2
3The Common Purpose of EU Migration Management
1 Introduction
2 The Basic Tenets of International Refugee Law
3 The Dual Common Purpose: Individual Protection and Collective Security
4 Responsibility-Sharing Under a Comprehensive Approach
5 European Cooperation and Support from the EU Institutions
5 Summary
4Acting on the Internal Dimension: Implementing EU Migration Management
1 Introduction
2 Responsibility for Individual Protection
2.1Allocating Responsibility under the Common European Asylum System (ceas)
2.2Responsibility and Exceptions to Mutual Trust
2.3Responsibility in light of interdependence
3 Responsibility for Public Security
3.1Enforcing a Return Decision on Behalf of Another Member State
3.2Issuing an Entry Ban on Behalf of All
4 Balancing a Fine Line after the Reintroduction of Internal Border Controls
4.1The Ruling in Arib: Countering the Temptation to Slip Away into the Outer Sphere
4.2Pushbacks of Asylum Seekers Registered in Another Member State
4.3Pushbacks of Third-Country Nationals Subject to an Entry Ban
5 Conclusion
5Acting on the External Dimension: The EU-Turkey Statement
1 Introduction
2 erta and the Theory of the European Spheres
2.1Finding an erta Effect
2.2Rationales for Duties of Abstention, Focussing on erta Exclusivity
3 erta and the Practice of Migration Management: The EU-Turkey Statement
3.1Background and Content
3.2Reception at the cjeu and in Legal Scholarship
3.3Applying the erta Doctrine to the EU-Turkey Statement
3.3.1 Whether the Statement Is an ‘International Agreement’
3.3.2 Analytical Difficulties and Normative Concerns
4 Moving Inside-Out in EU External Relations
4.1Towards a Formal erta Test: The Useful Effect of EU Law
4.2The Useful Effect in the Case Law on EU External Competences
5 Whether the EU-Turkey Statement Is Compatible with the Useful Effect of the Common Rules
5.1The Useful Effect of the Safe Third Country Rule
5.2The Union’s Independent Legal Capacity to Act Internally and Externally
5.2.1 The EU Asylum Acquis and, in Particular, the Asylum Procedures Directive
5.2.2 The Resettlement Scheme
5.2.3 The Facility for Refugees in Turkey
5.2.4 Visa Liberalisation, the Customs Union and Accession
6 Conclusion
Conclusions
1 Summary
2 The Future of Political Reflexivity
2.1New Pact on Migration and Asylum
2.2Towards EU Strategic Autonomy
Bibliography
Index
Part 1
1Representing the Union and the Nation State
1 Introduction
2 Representing the Nation State
2.1Political Reflexivity in the Constitutional State
2.2How the German Federal Constitutional Court Represents European Integration
3 Representing the Rechtsgemeinschaft: The Common Purpose of Mutual Non-interference
4 Representation, EU Law and the Empowerment of the Member States
4.1What Makes a (Good) Representative?
4.2What Makes Member States (Good) Representatives of the Union?
4.3How the Formal Representation of the Union May Become Contentious
5 Conclusion
2Acting on Behalf of the Common Purpose
1 Introduction
2 Moving between the Spheres (i): The Systemic Dimension
2.1Radical Pluralism: Each to Their Own
2.2Cosmopolitan Pluralism: Principles Anywhere
2.3Epistemic Pluralism: The Elusive Common Whole
2.4Synthesis: The Common Purpose in Constitutional Pluralism
3 The Principle of Autonomy in EU Law: Meaning and Limits
3.1The Original Justification
3.2Today: Upholding the Common Values and Mutual Trust
3.3Interim Conclusion
4 Solidarity and the Common Purpose of Migration Management
4.1The Concept of Solidarity
4.2Solidarity in the Inner Sphere
4.3Solidarity in the Intermediate Sphere
5 Moving between the Spheres (ii): The Instrumental Dimension
5.1The Relationship between Law and Governance
5.2Political Hybridity as Part of the Meta-constitutional Discourse
6 Conclusion
Part 2
3The Common Purpose of EU Migration Management
1 Introduction
2 The Basic Tenets of International Refugee Law
3 The Dual Common Purpose: Individual Protection and Collective Security
4 Responsibility-Sharing Under a Comprehensive Approach
5 European Cooperation and Support from the EU Institutions
5 Summary
4Acting on the Internal Dimension: Implementing EU Migration Management
1 Introduction
2 Responsibility for Individual Protection
2.1Allocating Responsibility under the Common European Asylum System (ceas)
2.2Responsibility and Exceptions to Mutual Trust
2.3Responsibility in light of interdependence
3 Responsibility for Public Security
3.1Enforcing a Return Decision on Behalf of Another Member State
3.2Issuing an Entry Ban on Behalf of All
4 Balancing a Fine Line after the Reintroduction of Internal Border Controls
4.1The Ruling in Arib: Countering the Temptation to Slip Away into the Outer Sphere
4.2Pushbacks of Asylum Seekers Registered in Another Member State
4.3Pushbacks of Third-Country Nationals Subject to an Entry Ban
5 Conclusion
5Acting on the External Dimension: The EU-Turkey Statement
1 Introduction
2 erta and the Theory of the European Spheres
2.1Finding an erta Effect
2.2Rationales for Duties of Abstention, Focussing on erta Exclusivity
3 erta and the Practice of Migration Management: The EU-Turkey Statement
3.1Background and Content
3.2Reception at the cjeu and in Legal Scholarship
3.3Applying the erta Doctrine to the EU-Turkey Statement
3.3.1 Whether the Statement Is an ‘International Agreement’
3.3.2 Analytical Difficulties and Normative Concerns
4 Moving Inside-Out in EU External Relations
4.1Towards a Formal erta Test: The Useful Effect of EU Law
4.2The Useful Effect in the Case Law on EU External Competences
5 Whether the EU-Turkey Statement Is Compatible with the Useful Effect of the Common Rules
5.1The Useful Effect of the Safe Third Country Rule
5.2The Union’s Independent Legal Capacity to Act Internally and Externally
5.2.1 The EU Asylum Acquis and, in Particular, the Asylum Procedures Directive
5.2.2 The Resettlement Scheme
5.2.3 The Facility for Refugees in Turkey
5.2.4 Visa Liberalisation, the Customs Union and Accession
6 Conclusion
Conclusions
1 Summary
2 The Future of Political Reflexivity
2.1New Pact on Migration and Asylum
2.2Towards EU Strategic Autonomy
Bibliography
Index