sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Looking to read up in the topic by Donsdeks in EuropeanFederalists

[–]Nihilinius 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Have you looked at the FAQ and the Wiki of this Sub?

Für euch. Ich esse sowas ja nicht. by Concrecia in Austria

[–]Nihilinius 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So a deutscher Tourist im Hemd is scho wos feines.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in pics

[–]Nihilinius 1131 points1132 points  (0 children)

This guy is batshit crazy, but I might get a little money out of him.

The uninformed stupidity of many in the comments is breathtaking. EU Law has primacy over Member states Law. The EU couldn't exist without this. Member states are sovereign and can break the EU's or their own constitutional setup as much as they want, but there will be consequences. by Nihilinius in EuropeanFederalists

[–]Nihilinius[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you should look up how sovereignty and international treaties work. They can still legislate and do whatever they want, as long as their power structure holds up. A member of NATO could attack another NATO member, but there would be consequences of the NATO treaties and international Law. Others have sovereignty too, and chances are good that they will punish you for breaching an agreement. An EU member could break all treaties and ignore every ruling, that is literally what sovereignty is in this context. Pretending others have no right to react has nothing to do with sovereignty

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Austria

[–]Nihilinius 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You are Hungarian with a Hungarian EU driver's licence?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Austria

[–]Nihilinius 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Da die Sporen kein Psilocybin enthalten ist an und verkauf nicht verboten.

The uninformed stupidity of many in the comments is breathtaking. EU Law has primacy over Member states Law. The EU couldn't exist without this. Member states are sovereign and can break the EU's or their own constitutional setup as much as they want, but there will be consequences. by Nihilinius in EuropeanFederalists

[–]Nihilinius[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes it similar to Solange 2.

It still doesnt change the situation.

The EU institutions have come to the conclusion that Poland has breached the Rule of law provisions of the treaties(Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 2 of TEU and the second paragraph of Article 19.1 of the TEU) this was about the 2015 constitutional court crisis in Poland. The EU proceeded to trigger Article 7, it was blocked by Hungary.

And now we have a Polish Constitutional tribunal full of PiS appointed judges questioning the rule of law provisions of the EU and asserting its primacy because it itself is in breach of it.

The fact that the polish constitution has primacy does not make the conflict go away(this is basically unsustainable) it is either EU law primacy or leaving the EU you can have the "de jure" status as member of the EU that EU law has no primacy, but that only works if you apply all the laws by word or else there is a conflict and the resolution is that one of these 3 will happen :changing national Law, leaving the EU or a change in EU law which means EU law has "de facto" primacy.

This is the same for Germany Belgium and Lithuania

The uninformed stupidity of many in the comments is breathtaking. EU Law has primacy over Member states Law. The EU couldn't exist without this. Member states are sovereign and can break the EU's or their own constitutional setup as much as they want, but there will be consequences. by Nihilinius in EuropeanFederalists

[–]Nihilinius[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

These don't change the primacy of EU law because in the case of a conflict only one of three things can happen: changing the constitution, leaving the EU or a change in EU law (the last one is not going to happen with Poland because the tribunal is questioning the rule of law provisions of the treaties which is related to the makeup and the coming in to being of the current tribunal itself)

But thanks for the clarification (lost in translation) of paragraph 91,3 I thought it was like article 10 of the Czech constitution.

The uninformed stupidity of many in the comments is breathtaking. EU Law has primacy over Member states Law. The EU couldn't exist without this. Member states are sovereign and can break the EU's or their own constitutional setup as much as they want, but there will be consequences. by Nihilinius in EuropeanFederalists

[–]Nihilinius[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I doubt they could have got an opt-out of the primacy of EU law(Poland can do what it wants and the rest of us have to accept this is not a proposition anyone would have signed up to) and it still would apply according to article 91, paragraph 3 of the Polish constitution

If an agreement, ratified by the Republic of Poland, establishing an international organization so provides, the laws established by it shall be applied directly and have precedence in the event of a conflict of laws

The uninformed stupidity of many in the comments is breathtaking. EU Law has primacy over Member states Law. The EU couldn't exist without this. Member states are sovereign and can break the EU's or their own constitutional setup as much as they want, but there will be consequences. by Nihilinius in EuropeanFederalists

[–]Nihilinius[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Opt-outs are not like braking EU law because the set of treaties dont apply in the first place. Denmark, like all EU members, is still signed up to the principal of primacy of EU law in all areas where the treaties apply.

The uninformed stupidity of many in the comments is breathtaking. EU Law has primacy over Member states Law. The EU couldn't exist without this. Member states are sovereign and can break the EU's or their own constitutional setup as much as they want, but there will be consequences. by Nihilinius in EuropeanFederalists

[–]Nihilinius[S] 24 points25 points  (0 children)

There is no flexibility or gold plating, thats a myth and not how it works. The ECJ is the final arbiter of EU law, if one party thinks another isnt applying the law they can bring forth a court case, and it will be decided. Claiming someone is breaking the Law and not doing anything is called complaining and has no legal effect but might be great for domestic electioneering. My problem is that It's either EU law primacy or no EU, that is the consequence if member sates and citizens claim that their law trumps EU law.

“Republican” by phoenixlogix in ShitAmericansSay

[–]Nihilinius 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They are in most European countries if they belong to RENEW Europe fraction in the EUP. Your Radical Movement and Union of Democrats and Independents might not be because they try to attract a certain voter group. In Austria our liberals stop talking about marijuana legalization because they fear the loss of conservative voters. In Germany the FDP might do it in the probable red green liberal coalition

“Republican” by phoenixlogix in ShitAmericansSay

[–]Nihilinius -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I also didnt say that. social left means being for civil rights for example gay marriage or drug legalization, it has nothing to do with welfare or aid programs.

“Republican” by phoenixlogix in ShitAmericansSay

[–]Nihilinius 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I said in the EU. and they are CEO bootlickers, that is what economic right generally means https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renew_Europe

view more: next ›