Going 'Belt and Braces': Domestic Effects of Euro-Crisis Law
This paper considers the effect of the recent EU measures relating to strengthened economic governance both at the EU level and the level of national (constitutional) law. We first explain the scope of EU competence in economic policy and its effects on Member State competence. We will then examine how this competence has been exercised during the past few years, in particular from the point of view of the domestic effects of the six-pack and two-pack, which constitute the ‘Belt’ needed to maintain stability in the euro area and thus hold the ‘trousers’ (economic policy decision-making) up. We then turn to the Fiscal Compact and the budgetary framework directive and their effects at national level, constituting the ‘Braces’ intended to ensure healthy national budgetary policies. The relevant question remains to be whether the current 'belt and braces' rules are the appropriate approach for preventing new crises. There are both legal and political reasons for reconsidering some of the solutions made during the crisis. Maybe the trousers are just too loose?
‘A Missing Piece of European Emergency Law: Legal Certainty and Individuals’ Expectations in the EU Response to the Crisis’
The principle of legal certainty and legitimate expectations as a legal tool for individuals in EU law – the mixed nature of EU emergency law: the ‘conferral principle’ limitation and the ways to expand executive powers in the EU response to the crisis ( Pringle , ESMA , BPP , OMT ) – the existence of legal certainty failures in that response: unpredictable and disjointed legislation and adjudication – arguments blurring legal certainty as the standard of review for EU emergency law: conditionality, international law and indirect legislation – the self-restraint attitude of the European Court of Justice and the risks of leaving litigation under the sole remit of national courts: normalising emergency powers and EU law autonomy at stake
Migration, Labor Mobility, and Relocation Assistance: The Case of the American Indian
This article, an example of "indirect" program evaluation, utilizes a 1/100 public use sample of American households from the 1970 U.S. census to examine family welfare levels among three categories of Indian families: (1) nonmigrant families living in traditional areas of Indian population concentration; (2) families in areas not receiving relocation assistance through the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA); and (3) migrant families moving to urban areas with BIA relocation assistance. The article concludes that the population of migrants receiving relocation assistance has a substantially higher level of economic welfare in both absolute and relative terms and that earnings are the principal source of increased welfare. It is suggested that such assistance might be utilized on a wider basis to assist other migrating populations.