Abstract
European citizenship has often served as a proxy for political visions of far-reaching social integration within the EU. Over the last years, this has been challenged by a number of judgments of the CJEU, which appear to increasingly restrict the access of economically inactive mobile EU citizens to social benefits under the Citizens Directive. By contrast, the more recent European Pillar of Social Rights enshrines the right to a minimum income for all citizens of the Union, regardless of their economic status or the legality of their residence. This article aims to address the resulting asymmetry between the Pillar and the CJEU’s current interpretation of the Citizens Directive, examining whether and to what extent the former could influence the latter. In doing so, it will discuss the background, objectives and interpretation of the Citizens Directive’s right to equal treatment, examine the scope of the minimum income principle contained in the Pillar, and highlight the key differences between the two.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 509-539 |
| Number of pages | 31 |
| Journal | European Journal of Migration and Law |
| Volume | 21 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2019 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Is there a way where there's a will? The tensions between the Court's Case Law and the pillar in delimiting transnational solidarity'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver