Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1964269
 
 

Footnotes (146)



 


 



The Nature of Union Citizenship between Autonomy and Dependency on (Member) State Citizenship: A Comparative Analysis of the Rottmann Ruling, or: How to Avoid a European Dred Scott Decision?


Dennis-Jonathan Mann


Europena University Institute (EUI)

Kai Purnhagen


Wageningen UR - Law and Governance Group; Erasmus University of Rotterdam - Rotterdam Institute of Law and Economics

November 24, 2011

Wisconsin International Law Journal, Forthcoming
Amsterdam Law School Research Paper No. 2011-46
Amsterdam Centre for European Law and Governance Research Paper No. 2011-09

Abstract:     
The legal nature of EU citizenship remains a hotly debated issue, in particular its relationship with Member State citizenship/nationality. In this paper, we comparatively analyze the ECJ’s Rottmann ruling and the US Supreme Court’s infamous Dred Scott decision. The paper begins with a critical analysis of the relevant EU case law and literature. In Rottmann, the ECJ, for the first time, had to deal with an inherent tension between the ‘autonomous’ EU legal order and EU citizenship’s ‘dependency’ on Member State nationality. We show that the ECJ took a rather cautious approach, leaving it mainly to the Member States and their courts to determine the ‘appropriateness’ of EU citizenship withdrawal. While the ECJ’s Rottmann approach has been criticized for being too reluctant, we argue that the ECJ – wittingly or unwittingly – was well advised to take such cautious steps with regard to European citizenship. On the basis of an in-depth analysis of Dred Scott v. Sandford we are able to demonstrate some of the challenges of shaping the boundaries of Union Citizenship. The separate opinions delivered in that decision provide an interesting insight into the possible effects of overemphasizing either the dependency or autonomy element of citizenship in multi-level systems. Seen in that light, the ECJ may have been well advised using a cautious, ‘middle-of the-road’ approach. Based on the comparative evidence from Dred Scott, we, however, find that the procedural implementation of the ECJ’s ‘Rottmann test’ lacks bite. As a result, Member States that seek to neglect the autonomous feature of European law can easily use it as a carte blanche. We conclude our paper by proposing a refined ‘Rottmann test’ that avoids Dred Scott-style ‘all or nothing’ excesses and yet can help to strengthen EU citizenship. Under such a refined test, withdrawal of Member State citizenship has to be justified by arguments from European law also, which means that Member States may only withdraw European citizenship when their reasoning is soundly justified also by this standard. Given the lack of primary and secondary law in this respect de lege lata, these minimum legal requirements need to be defined by the ECJ. Unfortunately, in Rottmann, the ECJ missed the opportunity to do so in a coherent way.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 51

Keywords: citizenship, autonomy, dependency, European Court of Justice, Rottmann

JEL Classification: K33

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: November 25, 2011 ; Last revised: October 22, 2012

Suggested Citation

Mann, Dennis-Jonathan and Purnhagen, Kai, The Nature of Union Citizenship between Autonomy and Dependency on (Member) State Citizenship: A Comparative Analysis of the Rottmann Ruling, or: How to Avoid a European Dred Scott Decision? (November 24, 2011). Wisconsin International Law Journal, Forthcoming; Amsterdam Law School Research Paper No. 2011-46; Amsterdam Centre for European Law and Governance Research Paper No. 2011-09. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1964269

Contact Information

Dennis-Jonathan Mann
Europena University Institute (EUI) ( email )
Fiesole, Tuscany
Italy
HOME PAGE: http://www.eui.eu/Personal/Researchers/mann/
Kai Peter Purnhagen (Contact Author)
Wageningen University and Research Center (WUR) - Law and Governance Group ( email )
Hollandseweg 1
Wageningen, 6706KN
Netherlands
Erasmus University of Rotterdam - Rotterdam Institute of Law and Economics ( email )
Burgemeester Oudlaan 50
PO box 1738
Rotterdam, 3000 DR
Netherlands
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 879
Downloads: 151
Download Rank: 87,034
Footnotes:  146

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.250 seconds