National constitutional courts in the European constitutional democracy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article critically assesses the transformation of national constitutional courts’ place in the law and politics of the EU and its Member States. This process, which has its origins in the foundational constitutional doctrines of EU law, has recently been accelerated on the one hand by a handful of recent European Court of Justice (the ECJ) decisions and on the other hand by national constitutional courts’ own approach to EU law. The ECJ’s doctrine, based on an orthodox understanding of the primacy of EU law, fails to acknowledge the difference between constitutional and ordinary national courts implementing the distinction between ordinary and constitutional legality. At the same time some national constitutional courts show little sensibility to the nature of EU law and to the symbiotic relationship between constitutional democracies established after World War II and European integration. The assessment is based on the idea of European constitutional democracy, which is briefly sketched here. The article argues that maintaining the special place of national constitutional courts is in the vital interest of both the EU and its Member States.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it