The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has played a vital role in promoting the process of European integration. In recent years, however, the expansion of EU law has led it to impact ever more politically sensitive issues, and controversial ECJ judgments have elicited unprecedented levels of criticism. Can we expect the Court to sustain its role as a motor of deeper integration without Member States or other countervailing forces intervening? To answer this question, we need to revisit established explanations of the Court's power to see if they remain viable in the Court's contemporary environment. We also need to better understand the ultimate limits of the Court's power - the means through which and extent to which national governments, national courts, litigants and the Court's other interlocutors attempt to influence the Court and to limit the impact of its rulings. In this book, leading scholars of European law and politics investigate how the ECJ has continued to support deeper integration and whether the EU is experiencing an increase in countervailing forces that may diminish the Court's ability or willingness to act as a motor of integration. This book was published as a special issue of the Journal of European Public Policy.

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has played a vital role in promoting the process of European integration. In recent years, however, the expansion of EU law has led it to impact ever more politically sensitive issues, and controversial ECJ judgments have elicited unprecedented levels of criticism. Can we expect the Court to sustain its role as a motor of deeper integration without Member States or other countervailing forces intervening? To answer this question, we need to revisit established explanations of the Court's power to see if they remain viable in the Court's contemporary environment. We also need to better understand the ultimate limits of the Court's power - the means through which and extent to which national governments, national courts, litigants and the Court's other interlocutors attempt to influence the Court and to limit the impact of its rulings. In this book, leading scholars of European law and politics investigate how the ECJ has continued to support deeper integration and whether the EU is experiencing an increase in countervailing forces that may diminish the Court's ability or willingness to act as a motor of integration. This book was published as a special issue of the Journal of European Public Policy.

This is an open access title available under the terms of a CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International licence. It is free to read at Oxford Scholarship Online and offered as a free PDF download from OUP and selected open access locations. The European Court of Justice is one of the most important actors in the process of European integration. Political science still struggles to understand its significance, with recent scholarship emphasizing how closely rulings reflect member states' preferences. This book argues that the implications of the supremacy and direct effect of the EU Treaty have still been overlooked. As it constitutionalizes an intergovernmental treaty, the European Union has a detailed set of policies inscribed into its constitution that are extensively shaped by the Court's case law. If rulings have constitutional status, their impact will be considerable, even if the Court only occasionally diverts from member states' preferences. By focusing on the four freedoms of goods, services, persons, and capital, as well as citizenship rights, the book analyses how the Court's development of case law has ascribed a broad meaning to these freedoms. The constitutional status of this case law constrains policymaking at the European and member-state levels. Different case studies show how major pieces of EU legislation partly codify case law. Judicialization is important in the EU. It also directly constrains member-state policies. Court rulings oriented towards individual disputes are difficult to translate into general policies-but if they have constitutional status they have to go through this process. Policy options are thereby withdrawn from majoritarian decision-making. As the Court cannot be overruled, short of a Treaty change, its case law casts a long shadow over policymaking in the European Union, undermining the legitimacy of this political order.