An issue similar to the EU-Hungary conflict led to the American Civil War
The Polish Constitutional Court has ruled on the issue of EU primacy. Its prime minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, submitted a motion back in March asking him to investigate whether the new law could override the Polish constitution. This followed a ruling by a court of the European Union on judicial reform of the Polish ruling party. The Luxembourg body stated that the rules on disciplinary liability for judges were contrary to EU law. Ursula von der Leyen also strongly rejected the legal interpretation of the Polish constitutional fine. The President of the European Commission has stated that he will defend the principles of the European Union’s legal order. Who is right, according to Péter Hack, a jurist and university professor?
In fact, two concepts conflict. Ursula von der Leyen represents the European Union becoming a federal state modeled on the United States. Let there be an exercise of power at the federal level and be subordinated to it at the national level. This vision has been present in the founding forces of the Union from the outset, and it is represented by the European Parliament, which could increase its own power, and so is the Commission. According to them, by joining the union, states gave up their sovereignty. They believe that EU law takes precedence over national law.
In contrast, there is another aspiration, which is represented, for example, by the German, Polish Constitutional Court and the Hungarian government. They say that by joining the union, they gave up their sovereignty only in the areas for which the treaties enshrine it. Outside these areas, national law takes precedence over new law. The German Constitutional Court has ruled that in some areas the European Court of Justice goes beyond the powers provided by EU law, and this has now been stated by the Polish Constitutional Court.