I know at this point the Zeit is just teasing me. But this is interesting: The President of the German BVerfG also criticises the Polish judiciary forms in the interview to be published tomorrow. This shows just how messy the situation is (thread)
Namely: 1) After the publication of the BVerfG’s ECB decision there was immediate near-consensus of commentators that this decision causes significant collateral damage by providing cover for the Polish and Hungarian democratic backsliding. How?
The BVerfG refused to follow an ECJ judgment and held it to be ultra vires - beyond the powers of the EU. The argument will be repeated (with ample referendes to the BVerfG) concerning ECJ judgments relating to the democratic backsliding.
2) Given that this connection was so obvious in the debate it was obvious that it would come up in an interview. Dismissing the connection (they don’t need us to find that argument) is an obvious response, but also criticism of the democratic backsliding.
How will that criticism be perceived after the BVerfG‘s judgment? Will it still have the same force as before? What of the court’s decision to do interviews the way they do?
