March 27, 2015

Conference at LSE: 'Resilience or Resignation? National Parliaments and the EU', 10 April 2015

Friend of the network Davor Jancic (British Academy Newton Fellow, LSE), has asked us to forward the announcement below of the conference Resilience or Resignation? National Parliaments and the EU, which will take place at LSE on April 10.  Included in the speaker line-up is network member Peter Lindseth (UConn, this term Senior Emile Noël Fellow at NYU), as well as Katarzyna Granat (Emile Noël Fellow at NYU).  More details can be found here (including RSVP details) and the full announcement is below.


* * *


March 25, 2015

Summer School: "Democracy and the Financial Crisis in Europe," Amsterdam, June 29 - July 3, 2015

Network member Gareth Davies (VU University Amsterdam) has written to announce a summer school for doctoral students between June 29 and July 3, 2015 at VU University Amsterdam on "Democracy and the Financial Crisis in Europe."  A short summary is below, and more information can be found here.  The deadline for applications is April 14, 2015.

***

This one-week, full-time, intensive summer school is organized by ACCESS Europe and the VU University Amsterdam law school. ACCESS Europe is a co-operative venture between VU University and the University of Amsterdam, providing a platform for research and debate on Europe, the European Union and its Member States. It has recently been awarded Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence status.

The summer school will consist of a series of interactive seminars with leading scholars in law and political science. The 20-25 participants will explore the theme of "democracy and the financial crisis in Europe" from different angles, with plenty of opportunities to link it to their own research.

CFP: Sheffield University (UK) Conference on Skilled Migration Policies, September 15, 2015

Network member Francesca Strumia (Sheffield University) has asked that we pass along the following call for papers for a conference in September entitled "Unravelling the Talent Tale: Skilled Migration Policies between National Images, Membership Bonds and Economic Priorities."  See below and here for details.

***

Unravelling the Talent Tale: Skilled Migration Policies between National Images, Membership Bonds and Economic Priorities

Sheffield University School of Law
Tuesday September 15, 2015

with Professor Peter J. Spiro, Charles R. Weiner Professor of Law at Temple University Beasley School of Law (keynote speaker)

This one-day interdisciplinary conference, jointly sponsored by the Sheffield Faculty of Social Sciences Migration Research Group and the Sheffield Centre for International and European Law, proposes to bring together scholars, practitioners and institutional actors involved with the development and practice of skilled migration policies to consider a range of questions targeting the interrelation between attracting skilled migrants and redefining community boundaries and membership bonds.

Which concepts of talent underpin skilled migration policies and what kind of stake in the community do these concepts relate to? How do skilled migration policies alter existing paradigms for community closure and the nature of the ‘genuine links’ among community members? How do the claims to admission of skilled migrants relate to those of ‘standard’ migrants? How do these policies relate to narratives of sovereignty and nationalism?

Proposals for papers addressing the above questions from legal, political, sociological perspectives are encouraged. Paper proposals not exceeding 500 words in length and a one paragraph bio should be emailed by 30th April 2015 to skilledmigration.2015@gmail.com.  Successful applicants will be notified by mid-June 2015

For additional details and the full call please see http://migrationgovernance.org/activities_items/call-papers-skilled-migration-conference/.

Book Announcement: Michelle Egan, "Single Markets: Economic Integration in Europe and the United States"



Network member Michelle Egan (American University) has alerted us that her new book, Single Markets: Economic Integration in Europe and the United States, is now available from the Oxford University Press.  The publisher's blurb is below, and more information is available from the OUP site here.
***

This timely book provides in-depth analytical comparison of the nineteenth century evolution of the American single market with corresponding political, economic, and social developments in post-WWII European efforts to create a single European market. Building the regulatory framework needed for successful adoption of an integrated single market across diverse political units represents one of the most important issues in comparative political economy. What accounts for the political success or failure in creating integrated markets in their respective territories? When social discontent threatens market integration with populist backlash, what must be done to create political support and greater legitimacy?

Single Markets focuses on the creation of integrated economies, in which the United States and European Union experienced sharply contested ideas about the operation of their respective markets, conflict over the allocation of institutional authority, and pressure from competing political, economic, and social forces over the role and consequences of increased competition. Drawing upon four case studies, the book highlights the contestation surrounding the US and EU's efforts to create common currencies, expand their borders and territories, and deal with the pressures of populist parties, regional interests and varied fiscal and economic challenges. Theoretically, the book draws on work in European integration and American Political Development (APD) to illustrate that the consolidation of markets in the US and EU took place in conjunction with the expansion of state regulatory power and pressure for democratic reform.

Single Markets situates the consolidation of single markets in the US and EU in a broader comparative context that draws on research in economics, public administration, political science, law, and history.

March 23, 2015

Changes at Europaeus: New Look, New Team, and More

In light of our (happily) increasing traffic and membership, Europaeus is pleased to announce a re-launch, complete with a fresh new design, an expanded editorial team, and a broader remit that welcomes substantive scholarship, thoughts, and ideas from our transatlantic network.  Daniel Francis joins us from NYU as a co-editor, and we are assembling a team of contributing editors, drawn from both sides of the Atlantic, under the leadership of network member Dan Kelemen (Rutgers).  We welcome your contributions, feedback on the new design, and other thoughts at europaeuslaw@gmail.com.

We look forward to hearing from you -- and to continuing to facilitate and highlight the work of our network.

-Peter

March 21, 2015

Follow-up: Daniel Halberstam on EU-ECHR Accession / Symposium on the Verfassungsblog

We're pleased to let readers know that the Verfassungsblog is currently hosting an online symposium to discuss Daniel Halberstam's recently posted article on the ECJ's Opinion 2/13 on EU-ECHR accession.  This article builds on remarks that Daniel made here at NYU in a panel discussion on January 30.  Among the participants is Thomas Streinz, a Hauser Global Scholar at NYU, who also participated in the January 30 discussion.  Below is the introduction posted by the editors at the Verfassungsblog, and the full symposium can be found here.  Readers and network members should take a look.
* * *

In a highly provocative article, Daniel Halberstam goes against the trend of sharp criticism of Opinion 2/13 by offering a constitutional perspective to explain the basis for the Court’s objections to the draft accession agreement. But the article also argues that accession must proceed to save the Union and identifies several ways to accomplish that goal. We invited a group of scholars to comment.

March 20, 2015

Book Announcement: Antoine Vauchez, Brokering Europe: Euro-Lawyers and the Making of a Transnational Polity



Network member Antoine Vauchez (Paris I-Sorbonne/CNRS) has let us know that his book
L'Union par le droit has now appeared in English translation from Cambridge.  Entitled Brokering Europe: Euro-Lawyers and the Making of a Transnational Polity, the publisher's blurb is below and more details can be found on the CUP site here.

* * *

Since the 1960s, the nature and the future of the European Union have been defined in legal terms. Yet, we are still in need of an explanation as to how this entanglement between law and EU polity-building emerged and how it was maintained over time. While most of the literature offers a disembodied account of European legal integration, Brokering Europe reveals the multifaceted roles Euro-lawyers have played in EU polity, notably beyond the litigation arena. In particular, the book points at select transnational groups of multipositioned legal entrepreneurs which have been in a situation to elevate the role of law in all sorts of EU venues. In doing so, it draws from a new set of intellectual resources (field theory) and empirical strategies only very recently mobilized for the study of the EU. Grounded on an extensive historical investigation, Brokering Europe provides a revised narrative of the 'constitutionalization of Europe'.

March 15, 2015

The Network on SSRN: Noga Morag-Levine, "The History of Precaution"

Network member Noga Morag-Levine (Michigan State) has a new article on SSRN, entitled "The History of Precaution," exploring transatlantic debates over precaution from a legal-historical perspective.  The abstract is below, and the full article can be found here.

* * *

The distinctiveness of European from American regulatory cultures or traditions is a matter of longstanding controversy. Two recent books — The Politics of Precaution by David Vogel — and The Reality of Precaution, edited by Jonathan Wiener with several others — have made notable contributions to this debate. Both books argue that regulatory cultures or traditions are incapable of explaining current differences between American and European approaches to precaution, which they define as regulatory stringency. For Wiener, this conclusion derives from the inconsistency of patterns of stringency between the United States and Europe. Vogel argues that while the stringency of current European environmental regulation indeed exceeds that of its U.S. counterpart, the split is unstable and opened relatively recently. In combination, the books aspire to put to rest an entire family of historical-institutional explanations for cross-national regulatory differences in the transatlantic context and beyond.

This essay draws from legal history to argue for an alternative position: legal traditions and their associated administrative-law principles are highly relevant to current transatlantic conflicts over precaution. The paper’s starting point is the distinction between two separate meanings of the precautionary principle, the first prescriptive, and the second permissive. In its prescriptive sense the precautionary principle urges regulators to take stringent mitigation measures in the face of scientifically uncertain risks. In its permissive sense, the principle authorizes the state to regulate when the relevant harms are scientifically uncertain. Conflicts over permissive precaution thus inherently reflect divergent views of the scope of the state’s autonomy in the regulation of risk. These disparate views correspond closely, in turn, with relevant differences between the administrative law traditions respectively associated with Anglo-American common law and Continental civil law.

March 13, 2015

CFP: International Society of Public Law (ICON·S), 2015 Conference on "Public Law in an Uncertain World", New York City, July 1-3

Network member Gráinne de Búrca has asked us to pass along the following call for papers from the International Society of Public Law (ICON·S) for their conference in July entitled "Public Law in an Uncertain World."  See below and here for details.

***


International Society of Public Law (ICON·S)
2015 Conference
New York City, July 1-3
Call for Panels and Papers
“Public Law in an Uncertain World”

ICON-S invites submissions for papers and fully-formed panels for its 2015 Conference on “Public Law in an Uncertain World”.

The Conference will take place in New York City, on July 1-3, 2015, at the New York University School of Law.

The Conference will feature a keynote address as well as three plenary sessions on the Conference theme. A provisional program can be found here. The heart of the Conference, however, will be the two days devoted to the papers and panels selected through this Call.

ICON-S welcomes both individual papers as well as proposals for fully-formed panels. Panel proposals should include at least 3 papers by scholars who have agreed in advance to participate and should identify one or two discussants, who may also be paper presenters. Concurrent panel sessions will be scheduled over two days. Each concurrent panel session will last 1 hour and 30 minutes.

The plenary sessions are not intended to limit the subject-matter scope of individual paper submissions and fully-formed panel proposals. Paper and panel proposals may focus on any theoretical, historical, comparative, empirical, doctrinal, philosophical or practical perspective related broadly to public law, including administrative law, constitutional law, criminal law, or international law in all of their possible domestic, transnational, supranational, international and global variants related to the 2015 Conference theme. The purpose of this conference is to explore and evaluate the function and limits of public law in our uncertain world in relation to war and peace, human rights, religion, state-building, constitution-making, formal and informal institutional change, revolutionary movements, national security as well as but not limited to the economy, the environment and the challenge of new technologies.

We invite potential participants to refer to the ICON-S Mission Statement when choosing a topic.
ICON-S is by no means restricted to public lawyers! We particularly welcome panel proposals that offer a genuine multi-disciplinary perspective from various areas of law (including civil, commercial, criminal, tax, and labor law), as well as from scholars from the humanities and the social sciences with an interest in the study of public law and (un)certainty.

We welcome submissions from both senior and junior scholars (including advanced Ph.D. students) as well as practitioners.

All submissions must be made on the ICON-S website (www.icon-society.org) by April 10, 2015.

Successful applicants will be notified by May 1, 2015.

All participants will be responsible for their travel and accommodation expenses.

March 5, 2015

The Network on SSRN: Daniel Halberstam, "'It's the Autonomy, Stupid!' A Modest Defense of Opinion 2/13 on EU Accession to the ECHR, and a Way Forward"

Network member Daniel Halberstam (Michigan) has a new piece posted on SSRN, entitled "'It's the Autonomy, Stupid!' A Modest Defense of Opinion 2/13 on EU Accession to the ECHR, and a Way Forward".  This piece builds on the presentation that Daniel made at the Jean Monnet Center at NYU in January.  It will also soon appear in the German Law Journal and be the subject of a symposium on the Verfassungsblog.  The abstract can be found below and the full article can be downloaded here.


* * *

Opinion 2/13 of the European Court of Justice (striking down the draft agreement on accession to the ECHR) has been widely derided as “unsubstantiated,” purely “self-interested,” and “playground politics.” This Article disagrees with that assessment. The Article provides the first comprehensive legal analysis and reconstruction of the Opinion’s many objections to show why the Court’s concerns are mostly warranted. At the same time, however, the Article explains why accession to the ECHR is not only important for human rights, but also vital to save the European Union itself. Finally, the Article points the way forward, arguing for changes (though not all those the Court demands) that must be, and can be, made to allow accession to proceed.