Schmidt, Susanne K.
Loading...
Preferred name
Schmidt, Susanne K.
Official Name
Schmidt, Susanne K.
Main Affiliation
ORCID
GND
15 results
Now showing 1 - 10 of 15
- Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Labor migration and migrant social protection in three regional organizations – Inequalities as a driving force?This paper compares how three regional organizations, namely ASEAN, the EU and Mer- cosur, have addressed the question of movement of labor between member states. Most prominently, we compare the extent to which citizens of other member states are included into national systems of social protection within these regions. For each organization, the paper identifies milestone agreements that pertain to or move towards freedom of move- ment and/or allow intra-regional migrants to access social security. It connects the trajec- tory of agreements to the level of inequality at the respective points in time, both in regard to GDP per capita and, where available, welfare state effort measured as social expen- ditures as a percentage of GDP. Our findings point to regional inequality – especially in regard to economic standing and to some extent also welfare state effort – as factors that are associated with differences both between regional organizations as well as differ- ences within organizations over time.ReportBand:2061 40 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Introduction - The European Court of Justice and legal integration: perpetual momentum?(2012-01); -journal articleBand:19Heft:1315 329 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Mutual recognition ‘on trial’: the long road to services liberalizationIn his 1986 White Paper on completing the single market, Lord Cockfield ailed mutual recognition as the miracle formula for the much needed liberalization of services markets. Twenty years later, the European Union is passing a services directive where the principle of mutual recognition is conspicuously absent, at a time when effective liberalization seems ever more necessary. How do we explain this puzzle? Why has mutual recognition been put on “trial”? We make three interrelated arguments. First, the initial draft directive overlooked the EU’s prior experience in this area which is one of “managed” mutual recognition. Secondly, the political context had changed significantly, with enlargement exacerbating the distributional consequences of the adoption of mutual recognition. Thirdly, the final compromise succeed-ed precisely because it recovers the spirit of the managed mutual recognition, albeit in a minimalist form. Nevertheless, final agreement has come at a price: the symbolic sacrifice of the principle of mutual recognition itself.journal articleBand:14Heft:5288 271 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Squaring the circle with mutual recognition? Demoi-cratic governance in practiceThis paper analyzes the experience of the EU with mutual recognition in the single market for goods and the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) as examples of multi-centered governance. In how far is it possible to respond to the functional needs for transborder mobility while protecting the choices of demoi and individual rights? Does the experience in the EU show that recognition of diversity is an alternative to harmonization and unity? The single goods market has developed far-reaching vertical elements falling short of a multi-centered regime. With a duty to recognize all rules, it may become meaningless to determine own rules. The EAW, in contrast, operates as a horizontal system but violates the rights of individuals, while honouring those of demoi.journal articleBand:22Heft:1305 200 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Just Hitting the Nail or Also the Thumb? The Court’s Deference to Member StatesThe four freedoms are at the heart of the European integration project. Their proclaimed indivisibility contributed to the UK’s decision to withdraw from the EU, after limits to the free movement of persons were deemed unacceptable. Referring to Alexander Bickel’s analysis of the US Supreme Court, Zglinski’s ‘passive virtues’ refer to the practice of the European Court of Justice (the Court) to either grant member states’ executives and legislatures a margin of appreciation when regulating in the realm covered by free movement law, or to give their Courts scope for decentralised judicial enforcement. Such deference to the level of the member state, Zglinski argues, is the other side of the coin of the rise of the proportionality analysis, which empowers the Court to engage in far-reaching analyses of member states policies, entering genuinely political grounds under the ‘camouflage’ (p. 138) of a legal analysis. The book offers a detailed and systematic analysis of the Court’s free movement case law, tracing the growth of these two kinds of deference to member state institutions. The positive, empirical analysis is followed in the text by a normative argument for deference to member states’ institutions. Thus, Zglinski’s book is a model example of legal scholarship engaging with social sciences’ quantitative methods to describe legal developments as well as making the more traditional normative arguments of the discipline. The discussion of how the Court does and should administer the reach of its case law, and where it should carve out a role for member state institutions, is extremely timely and relevant. However, within this very convincing empirical and normative analysis, I struggle at times with the relatively mild interpretation of the findings. Is the extent of deference sufficient? Does the Court really meet its many challenges, given this empirical analysis, which uncovers a jurisprudence that is hardly guided by systematic rules and which seems haphazard? Zglinski’s comparison to the US experience, in particular, suggests that we may have to interpret the observations as hesitant steps in the right direction, falling short of what might, ideally, be required. Given the empirical complexity of the analysis, I will summarise the findings of the book in some detail, before setting out the instances where I find the interpretation lacks bite. I embed this alternative, more sceptical interpretation in a short comparison with what we find in the US, building on the author’s comparisons with the US Supreme Court. I conclude by arguing that without contestation and critical discussion of the right balance, the European Court is not in a good position to successfully master the many challenges it faces.journal articleBand:17Heft:2344 256 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Failing on the social dimension: Judicial law-making and student mobility in the EUNational welfare states and free movement rights are in tension in the European Union (EU). Yet, despite potential free-riding dynamics, fully developed welfare states appear remarkably resilient. Two explanations can account for this in the literature: institutional heterogeneity of welfare states leads to differential impact of free movement, and contained compliance with EU legal obligations means that non-discrimination provisions exist mainly on paper. By example of higher education and student financial maintenance, we show that under adverse conditions, free movement rights need exceptions to not undermine national welfare. Moreover, the incapacity of the European Court of Justice to provide clear and stringent guidelines in regards to EU students’ access to student benefits, confronts potential beneficiaries with significant legal uncertainty. This introduces new inequalities among EU students. Our analysis shows the limits of judge-made law in furthering social justice.journal articleBand:25Heft:10303 1137 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, When efficiency results in redistribution: the conflict over the sin-gle services marketThe discussion of the Services Directive from 2004 onwards showed an unprecedented extent of politicization of a single-market issue. Coinciding with the 2004 Eastern Enlargement round, the easing of the services freedom through the directive raised significant redistributive issues, given the differences in labour costs. The arti-cle analyzes why mutual recognition is so controversial in services, arguing that the relationship among member states, between governments and their citizens, and among differently regulated EU citizens matters. Partly, the directive lessens the risk of redistribution through the institutionalization of administrative cooperation between the home and the host member state. Partly, the directive fails, as member states may be forced to discriminate against their population in the name of the internal market.journal articleBand:32Heft:43194 352 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Judicial Europeanization. The case of Zambrano in IrelandThe Court of Justice of the European Union is an important motor of integration, and is said to be particularly strong in those cases, where the Council shows an inability to act. What is the relevance of the Court to Social Europe? Europeanization studies analyse how member states change due to European integration. Judicial Europeanization is a topic that is under-explored in the literature. Using a case-study approach, this paper analyses the Zambrano case, one of the most notable recent cases of judicial activism of the CJEU with regard to EU citizenship rights. Though the literature often assumes that member states only reluctantly embrace the requirements of case law, the Irish government immediately held its administration to implement the required changes. Analysing this case in greater detail and comparing it to the responses of several other member states promises to shed some light on the under-explored question of how Europeanization through case law proceeds, and what the Court may contribute to social Europe.journal articleBand:37Heft:4270 179 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Who cares about nationality? The path-dependent case law of the ECJ from goods to citizensThe role that the ECJ plays in European integration has been much discussed by political scientists. Less is known about how case law develops. In this contribution, I give a historical-institutionalist account and argue that path dependence explains the course that case law takes. Litigants provide positive feedback in this process, aiming to strengthen their rights by transferring legal arguments from one area to the next, leading to a convergent interpretation of the fundamental freedoms. The paper traces this development, analyzing how legal arguments were transferred from goods markets to the free movement of workers and citizenship as a result of positive feedback to a distinct legal interpretation. I discard alternative explanations that explain case law by drawing on the preferences of member states or judges.journal articleBand:19Heft:1244 241 - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Das Projekt der Europäischen Marktschaffung. Die gegenseitige Anerkennung und der Binnenmarkt für DienstleistungenDas Binnenmarktprojekt, das Mitte der achtziger Jahre begann, hat die Europäische Integration nachhaltig wieder belebt. Was aber sind die Folgen des Binnenmarktes? In diesem Aufsatz argumentiere ich, dass der aus der gegenseitigen Anerkennung so logisch folgende Regulierungswettbewerb die politikwissenschaftliche Diskussion fälschlich dazu verleitet hat, negative Folgen des Binnenmarktes vor allem in dieser Hinsicht zu sehen. Dieses Argument bezieht sich auf den Dienstleistungsbereich, der angesichts seiner wachsenden Bedeutung für Handel und Beschäftigung einen Schwerpunkt des Binnenmarktprogramms bildete. Theoretisch folgt ein Regulierungswettbewerb aus dem Prinzip der gegenseitigen Anerkennung; die juristische Konstruktion der Dienstleistungsfreiheit und die praktische Umsetzung der gegenseitigen Anerkennung für viele Dienstleistungen machen dies aber sehr unwahrscheinlich. Statt dessen scheint ein Problem relevanter, dem erst in Ansätzen Aufmerksamkeit gewidmet wurde: Die Folgen der sehr undeutlichen Kompetenzverteilung für die Handlungsmöglichkeiten der Mitgliedstaaten. Nicht so sehr ökonomische Zwänge schränken die national verbliebenen Handlungsmöglichkeiten ein, sondern die rechtliche Unsicherheit darüber, welche Kompetenzen überhaupt auf nationaler Ebene verblieben sind.journal articleBand:34261 144