Latest EU infringement proceedings - includes possible return to EU court to request fines re Polish forest protection and Hungarian law on NGOs; also includes environmental law, racism hate speech law, European Arrest Warrant

Some highlights from the infringement proceedings: details of the Commission allegations about failure to apply EU criminal law on racism and xenophobia, which includes Holocaust denial
The Commission alleges that three Member States have tried to shelter their own citizens from the application of European Arrest Warrants
Conversely the Commission claims that three Member States don't correctly apply EU law on presumption of innocence.
The Commission alleges that Hungary voted against the EU position on drugs policy in the United Nations re cannabis
This was a particularly close vote to downgrade cannabis; the Hungarian vote nearly flipped it: https://t.co/R5xJSBwRFc
The Dude is unimpressed
Asylum and the pandemic: the Commission alleges that Hungary breached asylum procedures law. The allegation is obviously correct, unless there's an unwritten exception re public health in the law.
Commission triggers process to go back to court to impose fines against Hungary re anti-NGO law
And also triggers process to go back to court to apply fines against Poland re nature protection

More from Law

High crime talk from Fredo


VA curfew


Sen. Grassley - Biden family investigated, potential financial crimes WW including China

Warning


March
Hot take: Courts might be able to review the legality of this impeachment, even under current political-question doctrine. Here’s why and how the issue might arise:


Suppose Senate convicts and disqualifies Trump from ever holding federal office. Trump files paperwork to run anyway, but state officials deny his application, citing his Senate impeachment judgment. Trump sues, arguing that the judgment is void.

Normally a legal dispute about a prospective candidates eligibility to run would certainly present a justiciable case or controversy. But are courts bound to accept the Senate impeachment judgment as valid? Maybe not. Here’s why:

According to Article I, “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.” This is a small amount of judicial power vested in Congress. When trying impeachments, the Senate sits as a court.

The Senate’s judicial power includes the power to decide relevant legal questions that arise, such as what procedures are sufficient to constitute a “trial” w/in the Constitution’s meaning. Such legal determinations are conclusive, as SCOTUS held in Nixon v. United States (1993).

You May Also Like