{"id":43063,"date":"2021-06-25T10:00:00","date_gmt":"2021-06-25T09:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/cupblog.bluefusesystems.com\/?p=43063"},"modified":"2021-06-24T16:48:05","modified_gmt":"2021-06-24T15:48:05","slug":"glj-editorial-message-for-issue-22-4","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/blog\/2021\/06\/25\/glj-editorial-message-for-issue-22-4\/","title":{"rendered":"GLJ Editorial Message for Issue 22.4"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>\n

Dear reader,

It is with great pleasure that I can announce the publication of issue 22(4) of the German Law Journal, which compromises a rich selection of papers on European law and theory. We also launched a new Call for Special Issue proposals<\/u><\/a>. The submission deadline is the 3rd<\/sup> of September 2021.

Canihac<\/u><\/a> is kicking off this issue with a fresh look at the doctrine of constitutional pluralism. While the doctrine is made responsible for many of the current crises of democratic backsliding and EU supremacy, Canihac takes us back to the origins of the theory, which allow for a liberal as well as an illiberal reading and thus suggest that we should go beyond that dichotomy. As such, the paper adds to our ongoing discussions on European constitutional pluralism<\/u><\/a>.

Linden-Retek<\/u><\/a> then invites us to reimagine post-national legal solidarity by considering Habermasian constitutional theory in the context of European asylum law and reforms to the Dublin Regulation (another ongoing topic in our journal, see e.g. 21(3)<\/u><\/a>; 17(6)<\/u><\/a>; Anagnostaras<\/u><\/a>; Gotsova<\/u><\/a>). In Linden-Retek\u2019s view, post-national legal solidarity requires \u2018fallibilism and dynamic responsiveness\u2019 and can restore \u2018meaning to the transformative \u201ctransfer\u201d of sovereignty that post-national law had promised.\u2019

Scholtes<\/u><\/a> then takes a closer look at the concept of constitutional identity. While recognising some of the anti-pluralist critiques of constitutional identity, she ultimately defends the concept against abuse and advances three potential avenues for understanding constitutional identity abuse.

Considering the external relations case law of the CJEU, Dunbar<\/u><\/a> invites us to recognise the role of proportionality and argues that a more consistent recognition of the concept could improve legal certainty within that area of law.

Brito Bastos<\/u><\/a> moves our attention to European administrative law research and criticises that it is almost exclusively viewed through the eyes of national normative standards and doctrines and thus is likely to ignore aspects that are unique to EU administrative law. Accordingly, new methodological approaches are proposed \u2018to address, the ways in which preconceptions and normative expectations originating in national law have conditioned, and indeed prevented, the deeper doctrinal development of EU administrative law.\u2019

Schotel<\/u><\/a> takes a critical look at Frontex and the new Regulation on the European Border and Coast Guard. Specifically, he considers how Frontex\u2019s new operational powers can have a detrimental effect on individual legal protection.

Weinzierl<\/u><\/a> explores the \u2018EU\u2019s distinctly supranational conception of territoriality\u2019 by considering the individual elements of territoriality in the EU and calls for a \u2018theoretical model to evaluate and justify territoriality in a political community beyond the state\u2019 in order to address the legitimacy questions arising throughout the discussion.

Finally, Krzywo\u0144<\/u><\/a> discusses the emerging regulation to tackle electoral disinformation in the light of the ECHR. Given that the current political climate in many Member States provides a fruitful soil for such disinformation to flourish, this is certainly not the last time we have to consider the States\u2019 duties to protect democratic processes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We should also raise your attention to the two<\/u><\/a> <\/u><\/a>errata<\/u><\/a> regarding 22(3)<\/u><\/a> at the end of this issue.

As always, we wish you happy reading,

For the Editors-in-Chief,
Jule Mulder<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Dear reader, It is with great pleasure that I can announce the publication of issue 22(4) of the German Law Journal, which compromises a rich selection of papers on European law and theory. We also launched a new Call for Special Issue proposals. The submission deadline is the 3rd of September 2021. Canihac is kicking […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":583,"featured_media":40170,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,7],"tags":[8439,8440,8630],"coauthors":[8631],"class_list":["post-43063","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-law","category-social-sciences","tag-german-law-journal","tag-glj","tag-glj-editorial-message"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43063","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/583"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=43063"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43063\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":43065,"href":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43063\/revisions\/43065"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/40170"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=43063"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=43063"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=43063"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=43063"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}